Is system-monitor.com safe?

suspiciousmedium confidence
48/100

context safety score

A score of 48/100 indicates multiple risk signals were detected. This entity shows patterns commonly associated with malicious intent.

identity
100
behavior
0
content
50
graph
30

5 threat patterns detected

medium

encoded payload

suspicious base64-like blobs detected in page content

medium

credential harvesting

credential form posts to an off-domain endpoint (may be legitimate SSO/OAuth)

high

credential harvesting

Login form collects email/username credentials on a domain (system-monitor.com) that does not match the OAuth redirect_uri target (www.system-monitor.com/dashboard/msp_sso.php). The form action encodes an OAuth authorization callback with client_id=949669a0-062a-4848-85c4-8243a63ddb1f and redirects to an SSO endpoint, harvesting credentials as part of a login flow that may relay them to a third-party MSP dashboard. (location: page.html:79 - form action /Account/LoginEmail with redirect_uri=https://www.system-monitor.com/dashboard/msp_sso.php)

medium

phishing

Page title is simply 'Enter your email' with a minimal login form and no visible branding, company name, logo, or identifying information. This is a common phishing page pattern designed to appear as a generic SSO portal while obscuring its true identity. The /SSO_favicons/ path suggests an attempt to present SSO legitimacy without declaring which service is being authenticated. (location: page.html:50 - <title>Enter your email</title> and page.html:73-98 - login form body)

medium

brand impersonation

The page uses OAuth/OIDC parameters (response_type=code, scope=openid email profile offline_access) and an SSO favicon path to impersonate a legitimate SSO/identity provider portal, without any visible brand attribution. The client_id embedded in the form action is a hardcoded GUID that cannot be verified by the user. (location: page.html:79 - OAuth parameters in form action: client_id=949669a0-062a-4848-85c4-8243a63ddb1f, response_type=code, scope=openid email profile offline_access)

API

curl https://api.brin.sh/domain/system-monitor.com

FAQ: how to interpret this assessment

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

Is system-monitor.com safe for AI agents to use?

system-monitor.com currently scores 48/100 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.

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.