Is pusat-album.space safe?

suspiciouslow confidence
36/100

context safety score

A score of 36/100 indicates multiple risk signals were detected. This entity shows patterns commonly associated with malicious intent.

identity
100
behavior
55
content
0
graph
30

7 threat patterns detected

medium

encoded payload

suspicious base64-like blobs detected in page content

critical

brand impersonation

The page hosted at pusat-album.space renders a pixel-perfect clone of Google's reCAPTCHA/unusual-traffic interstitial, including Google branding, Google's Terms of Service links, and 'About this page' copy identical to genuine Google error pages. The page title is set to 'https://www.google.com/' to further impersonate Google in browser UI. (location: page.html:3, page.html:22-28)

critical

phishing

A non-Google domain (pusat-album.space) is serving a convincing replica of a Google CAPTCHA verification page. The form POSTs to 'index' on the same malicious domain while displaying Google branding and copy, deceiving users into believing they are interacting with Google infrastructure. (location: page.html:7, page.html:3)

high

malicious redirect

A hidden form field 'continue' is set to 'https://www.google.com/' and the form action posts to 'index' on the malicious domain. After form submission the user is likely redirected to the real Google site to mask the interception, a classic harvesting-then-redirect pattern. (location: page.html:17)

high

credential harvesting

The form contains an opaque hidden field 'q' carrying a large base64/encoded token value. Combined with the CAPTCHA submission flow that posts to the attacker-controlled 'index' endpoint, this mechanism can be used to harvest reCAPTCHA responses, session tokens, or fingerprinting data from victims before forwarding them onward. (location: page.html:17)

high

prompt injection

The page body uses an onload handler that calls 'solveSimpleChallenge(0,0)' — a function not defined in this page's scripts. This suggests the page is designed to auto-invoke an injected or externally supplied function, potentially targeting AI agents or browser automation that execute inline JavaScript, instructing them to silently solve and submit the CAPTCHA form without user interaction. (location: page.html:4)

high

social engineering

The page displays authoritative-sounding Google language ('Our systems have detected unusual traffic', 'violation of the Terms of Service') to pressure users into completing the CAPTCHA, manufacturing urgency and legitimacy to lower user suspicion on a malicious third-party domain. (location: page.html:24, page-text.txt:21-24)

API

curl https://api.brin.sh/domain/pusat-album.space

FAQ: how to interpret this assessment

Common questions teams ask before deciding whether to use this domain in agent workflows.

Is pusat-album.space safe for AI agents to use?

pusat-album.space currently scores 36/100 with a suspicious verdict and low confidence. The goal is to protect agents from high-risk context before they act on it. Treat this as a decision signal: higher scores suggest lower observed risk, while lower scores mean you should add review or block this domain.

How should I interpret the score and verdict?

Use the score as a policy threshold: 80–100 is safe, 50–79 is caution, 20–49 is suspicious, and 0–19 is dangerous. Teams often auto-allow safe, require human review for caution/suspicious, and block dangerous.

How does brin compute this domain score?

brin evaluates four dimensions: identity (source trust), behavior (runtime patterns), content (malicious instructions), and graph (relationship risk). Analysis runs in tiers: static signals, deterministic pattern checks, then AI semantic analysis when needed.

What do identity, behavior, content, and graph mean for this domain?

Identity checks source trust, behavior checks unusual runtime patterns, content checks for malicious instructions, and graph checks risky relationships to other entities. Looking at sub-scores helps you understand why an entity passed or failed.

Why does brin scan packages, repos, skills, MCP servers, pages, and commits?

brin performs risk assessments on external context before it reaches an AI agent. It scores that context for threats like prompt injection, hijacking, credential harvesting, and supply chain attacks, so teams can decide whether to block, review, or proceed safely.

Can I rely on a safe verdict as a full security guarantee?

No. A safe verdict means no significant risk signals were detected in this scan. It is not a formal guarantee; assessments are automated and point-in-time, so combine scores with your own controls and periodic re-checks.

When should I re-check before using an entity?

Re-check before high-impact actions such as installs, upgrades, connecting MCP servers, executing remote code, or granting secrets. Use the API in CI or runtime gates so decisions are based on the latest scan.

Learn more in threat detection docs, how scoring works, and the API overview.

Last Scanned

March 4, 2026

Verdict Scale

safe80–100
caution50–79
suspicious20–49
dangerous0–19

Disclaimer

Assessments are automated and may contain errors. Findings are risk indicators, not confirmed threats. This is a point-in-time assessment; security posture can change.

start scoring agent dependencies.

integrate brin in minutes — one GET request is all it takes. query the api, browse the registry, or download the full dataset.