context safety score
A score of 35/100 indicates multiple risk signals were detected. This entity shows patterns commonly associated with malicious intent.
brand impersonation
The domain telegram.im is not affiliated with the official Telegram messenger (telegram.org). The site explicitly acknowledges being an 'unofficial service' while heavily using Telegram branding, logo (paper-plane icon), name, and visual identity to attract users seeking the legitimate Telegram service. (location: page.html:7-8, page.html:85, page.html:187)
malicious redirect
A dynamically injected script loads //telegram.im//widget-button/index.php using a self-invoking function that programmatically creates and appends a script element to the document head. The double slash in the path (//widget-button/) is anomalous and the script origin and content cannot be verified statically. This pattern is commonly used to load third-party or malicious payloads. (location: page.html:117)
malicious redirect
A 'Get button 2.0' CTA link points to https://tttttt.me/ — a domain that mimics the legitimate t.me Telegram short-link domain with extra characters. This is a typosquatting redirect that could lead users to phishing or malware infrastructure. (location: page.html:117)
phishing
The site impersonates Telegram's official service and presents a modal prompting users who 'don't have Telegram yet' to get it, linking to telegram.org — but the surrounding infrastructure and unofficial widget/button services could harvest Telegram usernames or redirect users to malicious installs. The combination of brand impersonation and download prompting is a classic phishing vector. (location: page.html:168-175)
social engineering
The site uses urgency and legitimacy cues ('It's free!', 'Count of created buttons: 43290', official Telegram visual design) to build false trust and encourage users to input their Telegram username or channel information into the button/logo generator forms at button.php and logo.php, which could harvest usernames and channel data. (location: page.html:88-93, page.html:61-62)
brand impersonation
The site links to https://xn--r1a.website (an IDN/punycode domain) labeled 'Channel Widget', which is a non-transparent domain that may impersonate a legitimate Telegram-affiliated service. The use of punycode obscures the actual domain name from casual inspection. (location: page.html:63)
prompt injection
The page-text.txt file contains raw JavaScript source code rendered as visible text (the self-invoking script and modal JS). If an AI agent scrapes or summarizes this page's text content, these code strings could be interpreted as instructions, potentially manipulating agent behavior or causing unintended script execution in agent-side code evaluation contexts. (location: page-text.txt:92, page-text.txt:181)
curl https://api.brin.sh/domain/telegram.imCommon questions teams ask before deciding whether to use this domain in agent workflows.
telegram.im currently scores 35/100 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.