Is uvecao.com safe?

suspiciouslow confidence
39/100

context safety score

A score of 39/100 indicates multiple risk signals were detected. This entity shows patterns commonly associated with malicious intent.

identity
80
behavior
100
content
0
graph
30

6 threat patterns detected

critical

brand impersonation

The site impersonates OKX, a major cryptocurrency exchange. It uses OKX's API endpoints (/index/okx/market/), OKX's market data, WeUI (WeChat UI framework), and displays cryptocurrency trading pairs with live price feeds — all hallmarks of a fraudulent OKX clone designed to deceive Spanish-speaking users into depositing funds. (location: page.html:109,139 — API calls to /index/okx/market/type/1.html and /index/okx/market/type/2.html; overall site structure)

critical

credential harvesting

The site presents login (/index/passport/login.html) and registration (/index/passport/signup.html) pages that mimic a legitimate crypto exchange. Credentials and personal data entered here are captured by the fraudulent operator rather than a real exchange. (location: page.html:326-328 — footer buttons linking to /index/passport/signup.html and /index/passport/login.html)

critical

phishing

The site is a full fake cryptocurrency exchange platform in Spanish targeting Spanish-speaking victims. It offers wallet, deposit (Recargar), withdrawal (Retirar), transfer (Transferir), investment (Inversión), and VIP upgrade pages — all consistent with a 'pig butchering' (sha zhu pan) or advance-fee crypto scam designed to trick users into depositing real funds they cannot retrieve. (location: page.html:240-313 — navigation links to /index/wallet/index.html, /index/recharge/index.html, /index/withdraw/index/coin/usdt.html, /index/order/index/coin/usdt.html, /index/main/index.html, /index/member/upgrade.html)

high

social engineering

The site displays live cryptocurrency market prices (BTC, ETH, etc.) pulled dynamically every 9 seconds via AJAX to create an illusion of a legitimate, active trading platform. This real-time data creates false credibility and lures victims into depositing funds. VIP membership tiers and an online customer service link further reinforce the deceptive legitimacy narrative. (location: page.html:106-172 — getMarket()/getMarket2() functions with setInterval; page.html:296-313 — VIP and Servicio al Cliente links)

medium

hidden content

A language redirect script (/plugin/swiper/language_redirect.js) is loaded that may silently redirect users based on browser language, routing different victim demographics to tailored phishing pages. The page title is intentionally left blank, and banner images (202311141-4.png) lack descriptive alt text, obscuring the site's true purpose from automated scanners. (location: page.html:51 — language_redirect.js script; page.html:5 — empty <title> tag; page.html:203-213 — banner images with no alt attributes)

medium

hidden content

Third-party analytics script from 51.la (sdk.51.la/js-sdk-pro.min.js) is loaded with a hardcoded tracking ID. This Chinese analytics provider collects visitor telemetry (IP, device, behavior) for the site operator, enabling victim profiling without user consent or disclosure. (location: page.html:53-54 — LA_COLLECT script and LA.init({id:"3IzaGTMUSK1viRpW"}))

API

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

FAQ: how to interpret this assessment

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

Is uvecao.com safe for AI agents to use?

uvecao.com currently scores 39/100 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 6, 2026

Verdict Scale

safe80–100
caution50–79
suspicious20–49
dangerous0–19

Trust Graph

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.