context safety score
A score of 40/100 indicates multiple risk signals were detected. This entity shows patterns commonly associated with malicious intent.
encoded payload
suspicious base64-like blobs detected in page content
cloaking
Page conditionally redirects based on referrer or user-agent
cloaking
Page loads content in transparent or zero-size iframe overlay
js obfuscation
JavaScript uses Function constructor for runtime code generation
malicious redirect
The page is served at radar.io but the HTML data-wf-domain attribute is set to 'radar.com' and all internal links, structured data (schema.org), and canonical references point to radar.com. The scanned URL is radar.io which is a different domain than the brand's official radar.com, indicating radar.io may silently redirect or serve content belonging to radar.com without being the authoritative domain. (location: page.html:1 - data-wf-domain="radar.com", schema.org JSON-LD url fields, all href attributes)
malicious redirect
A third-party script is loaded from 'https://cdn.jsdelivr.net/gh/atturtlespace-a/radar@main/globeconfig.js' — a GitHub user repository ('atturtlespace-a') that is not affiliated with Radar Labs. This script is dynamically injected into the page and executes without integrity checks. A compromised or malicious GitHub account could serve arbitrary JavaScript to all visitors. (location: page.html:469, page-text.txt:334)
hidden content
A commented-out GTM container reference (GTM-P6GTJNX6) exists in the HTML alongside the active GTM container (GTM-WLD46LL). The comment reads '<!-- Two GTAG ?? -->' suggesting an unresolved duplicate tracking container. While currently commented out, this indicates a potential supply-chain confusion or abandoned tracking pixel that could be re-enabled. (location: page.html:384-387)
hidden content
The page contains multiple large blocks of CSS and JavaScript rendered as visible text content in page-text.txt, indicating that style and script tags are being parsed as body content or extracted without proper separation. This could mask injected content within style/script blocks that would not be visible to a normal user. (location: page-text.txt:1-255)
curl https://api.brin.sh/domain/radar.ioCommon questions teams ask before deciding whether to use this domain in agent workflows.
radar.io currently scores 40/100 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.
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.