context safety score
A score of 47/100 indicates multiple risk signals were detected. This entity shows patterns commonly associated with malicious intent.
social engineering
Site aggressively promotes online gambling (casino, slots, fish shooting games) with deceptive trust signals: fake legitimacy claims ('giấy phép hợp pháp' - legal license from Isle of Man and Cagayan), inflated aggregate ratings (4.8/5 from 254 reviews; 4.7/5 from 1200 reviews in structured data), and a 100% welcome bonus offer designed to lure users into depositing real money. (location: page.html: <meta name=description>, ld+json Casino and SoftwareApplication schemas)
credential harvesting
Page explicitly promotes login and registration flows (/Login, /Register) for a gambling platform operating under a numeric subdomain-style domain (qq8886.com), collecting user credentials and financial account details including bank accounts, USDT wallets, Momo Pay, and Zalo Pay. (location: page.html: BreadcrumbList ld+json (positions 3 and 4), paymentAccepted field in Casino schema)
brand impersonation
The domain qq8886.com uses the brand name 'QQ88' and canonical URL www.qq8886.com, which closely mimics the well-known QQ88 gambling brand. The numeric suffix '86' appended to 'qq88' is a common typosquatting/domain-variation technique used to impersonate a primary brand and capture misdirected traffic. (location: page.html: <title>, <link rel=canonical href=https://www.qq8886.com/>, metadata.json: domain qq8886.com)
social engineering
Structured data includes a fake physical address (Số 55, phố Thụy Khuê, Hà Nội, Vietnam) and fabricated contact details (admin@qq88.com, 0908667888) to create a false sense of legitimacy for an online gambling operation. The address domain in the contact email (qq88.com) differs from the site domain (qq8886.com), indicating the address is fabricated. (location: page.html: Casino ld+json schema, address and contactPoint fields)
social engineering
FAQ structured data instructs users to join a Telegram channel ('tham gia ngay kênh telegaram QQ88 phát code mỗi ngày') to receive daily codes and rewards — a common technique used by gambling and scam operations to funnel victims into unregulated messaging channels for further manipulation or credential collection. (location: page.html: FAQPage ld+json, Question 'Làm sao để nhận code miễn phí tại QQ88?')
obfuscated code
Three externally loaded JavaScript files with version-pinned query strings are loaded: aboutMerchant.js, domainCheck.js, and encrypt.js. The 'encrypt.js' filename suggests client-side encryption of user-submitted data (potentially credentials or financial info) prior to transmission, which can be used to evade network-level security inspection. The scripts are not inline and cannot be statically analyzed. (location: page.html: <script src='/res/aboutMerchant.js?v=18072'>, <script src='/res/domainCheck.js?v=18072'>, <script src='/res/encrypt.js?v=18072'>)
curl https://api.brin.sh/domain/qq8886.comCommon questions teams ask before deciding whether to use this domain in agent workflows.
qq8886.com currently scores 47/100 with a suspicious verdict and medium 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.
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.
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.
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.
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.
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.
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.
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.
integrate brin in minutes — one GET request is all it takes. query the api, browse the registry, or download the full dataset.