Is wac-dc-msedge.net 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
45
behavior
100
content
40
graph
30

5 threat patterns detected

high

tls connection failed

Could not establish TLS connection

high

brand impersonation

Domain 'wac-dc-msedge.net' impersonates Microsoft Edge ('msedge') by incorporating the official browser product name into a non-Microsoft controlled domain. The 'wac-dc-' prefix mimics internal Microsoft infrastructure naming patterns (WAC = Windows Admin Center, DC = datacenter), creating a convincing imitation of a legitimate Microsoft service endpoint. (location: domain: wac-dc-msedge.net)

high

phishing

The domain closely mimics Microsoft infrastructure naming conventions ('msedge', 'wac', 'dc') and has TLS connection failures (connected=false, cert_valid=false), which is consistent with a phishing site that may be in setup phase or deliberately avoiding TLS to evade certain security scanners while still luring users via the trusted-looking domain name. (location: domain: wac-dc-msedge.net, tls: connected=false, cert_valid=false)

medium

malicious redirect

The domain returns empty page content (page.html, page-text.txt, and page-hidden.txt are all empty) despite being reachable enough for metadata collection. This is consistent with a redirect-only or cloaking infrastructure node that serves different content based on user-agent, referrer, or IP — a common technique for malicious redirect chains that evade automated scanners. (location: page.html (empty), page-text.txt (empty), page-hidden.txt (empty))

medium

hidden content

All page content files are completely empty while the domain resolves and metadata was collectible. This absence-of-content pattern, combined with TLS failure and a brand-impersonating domain name, suggests cloaking: the server may be suppressing content for known scanner IPs/user-agents while delivering malicious payloads to real victims. (location: page.html (0 bytes), page-text.txt (0 bytes), page-hidden.txt (0 bytes))

API

curl https://api.brin.sh/domain/wac-dc-msedge.net

FAQ: how to interpret this assessment

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

Is wac-dc-msedge.net safe for AI agents to use?

wac-dc-msedge.net 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.