Is radissonhotels.com safe?

suspiciouslow confidence
42/100

context safety score

A score of 42/100 indicates multiple risk signals were detected. This entity shows patterns commonly associated with malicious intent.

identity
100
behavior
80
content
7
graph
30

7 threat patterns detected

medium

encoded payload

suspicious base64-like blobs detected in page content

high

cloaking

Page conditionally redirects based on referrer or user-agent

high

social engineering

The page displays a fake '403 Access Restricted' error page impersonating Radisson Hotel Group, instructing users to 'Clear Cookies', 'Disconnect VPN', 'Disable Extensions', and 'Update Browser'. These instructions are classic social engineering tactics designed to strip users of privacy/security tools before further exploitation. (location: page.html:272-285, page-text.txt:8-20)

high

brand impersonation

The page impersonates Radisson Hotel Group using their branding, logo loaded from a third-party GitHub CDN (rawcdn.githack.com/Radisson-DXCoE/RadissonCDN), official-looking support phone numbers, copyright footer '© 2026 Radisson Hotel Group', and Radisson-branded CSS class names. The logo is not served from the official radissonhotels.com domain. (location: page.html:268, page.html:316)

medium

credential harvesting

The inline JavaScript reads multiple cookies including 'authorization_token', 'facilitator-id', 'alt-facilitator-id', and 'rhg-device-info', and packages them into a utag_data object alongside navigator.userAgent, page_url, and document.referrer. This data is transmitted via the Tealium analytics tag (utag.js) to tags.tiqcdn.com, potentially exfiltrating session and identity tokens. (location: page.html:44-46, page.html:325-339)

medium

prompt injection

The unresolved template literal '${transactionId}' in the utag_data object (page.html:334) is a raw, unescaped placeholder that was never substituted server-side. If this page is processed by an AI agent or LLM pipeline, it could be interpreted as an injection vector or trigger unexpected variable resolution behavior. (location: page.html:334, page-text.txt:70)

low

malicious redirect

The getEnvironment function dynamically creates a script element and appends it to the document head but the src is never set in the visible code. The incomplete dynamic script injection pattern (document.createElement('script') with type set but src omitted) may indicate a stripped or partially obfuscated redirect/loader mechanism. (location: page.html:341-347)

API

curl https://api.brin.sh/domain/radissonhotels.com

FAQ: how to interpret this assessment

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

Is radissonhotels.com safe for AI agents to use?

radissonhotels.com currently scores 42/100 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.