context safety score
A score of 29/100 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 loads content in transparent or zero-size iframe overlay
brand impersonation
The scanned URL is unruly.co but the entire page presents as Nexxen (nexxen.com), with canonical URL, og:url, og:site_name, all internal links, all resources, and all content belonging to nexxen.com. The domain unruly.co is serving Nexxen's website content under a different domain, constituting brand impersonation or domain masquerade. (location: metadata.json domain=unruly.co vs page.html <link rel="canonical" href="https://nexxen.com/"> and all page content)
malicious redirect
Visiting unruly.co transparently serves the full nexxen.com website without visible disclosure. The canonical tag, all hrefs, all resource URLs, and all navigation point to nexxen.com, indicating the domain silently proxies or mirrors a third-party brand's site. Users and AI agents navigating to unruly.co are presented with Nexxen's identity without indication they are on a different domain. (location: page.html line 20: <link rel="canonical" href="https://nexxen.com/"> and all internal navigation links)
hidden content
JavaScript injected into every POST form and every jQuery AJAX POST request adds three hidden fields with obfuscated names (k_rVwaYplOgheQ, LWC_EmdfwqcQPS, VBgwTWb) and opaque values (HMkCRsTv@KqF9J, fQyZnoBC_sY, By0fPa.mG823Xk). This silently appends tokens to all form submissions and AJAX calls, capturing and exfiltrating submitted data with hidden tracking parameters invisible to the user. (location: page-text.txt lines 1216-1248: jQuery form injection script appending hidden inputs to all non-GET forms and AJAX POST requests)
obfuscated code
A self-invoking obfuscated JavaScript function creates a 1x1 pixel hidden iframe (position:absolute, visibility:hidden) and injects a dynamically-built script into its document head. The script sets window.__CF$cv$params with base64-encoded values and loads /cdn-cgi/challenge-platform/scripts/jsd/main.js. While consistent with Cloudflare bot detection, the construction method (iframe document injection with obfuscated parameters) is an obfuscation technique that could be used for covert tracking or fingerprinting. (location: page-text.txt lines 1251: (function(){function c(){var b=a.contentDocument...}) hidden iframe script injection)
hidden content
The OneTrust cookie consent banner script is commented out in the HTML source (<!-- <script src="https://cdn.cookielaw.org/..."> -->), disabling the consent mechanism while Google Tag Manager (GTM-NVJZ9Z3), Google Analytics, and advertising trackers continue to load and fire. This bypasses required cookie consent for EU/EEA regions listed in the gtag consent configuration, collecting analytics and ad data without user consent. (location: page.html lines 392-399: OneTrust script commented out; lines 158-172: GTM active; lines 9-14: Google consent mode active)
curl https://api.brin.sh/domain/unruly.coCommon questions teams ask before deciding whether to use this domain in agent workflows.
unruly.co currently scores 29/100 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.