Is wallet-magiceden-io.webflow.io safe?

suspiciousmedium confidence
47/100

context safety score

A score of 47/100 indicates multiple risk signals were detected. This entity shows patterns commonly associated with malicious intent.

identity
100
behavior
100
content
0
graph
74

5 threat patterns detected

critical

brand impersonation

The site is hosted on 'wallet-magiceden-io.webflow.io' — a Webflow subdomain that mimics the legitimate Magic Eden Wallet domain (wallet.magiceden.io) by embedding the real domain name with hyphens. It replicates Magic Eden branding, logos, wallet imagery, and product copy in full to deceive users into believing they are on the official site. (location: domain: wallet-magiceden-io.webflow.io, page title, navbar branding, hero section, footer)

critical

phishing

The site is a high-fidelity clone of the official Magic Eden Wallet site designed to lure users into downloading a wallet extension or providing credentials/seed phrases. The 'Download ME Wallet' and 'Download for Chrome' buttons (href='/download') lead to a path on this fraudulent domain rather than the legitimate Chrome Web Store or wallet.magiceden.io. (location: page.html: navbar 'Download for Chrome' button, hero 'Download ME Wallet' button (href='/download'), CTA 'Download' button)

high

credential harvesting

A newsletter signup form collects email addresses via HTTP GET method, submitting user data to Webflow form handlers under attacker control. The form id 'wf-form-Newsletter-Signup-Form' gathers PII on a fraudulent domain impersonating Magic Eden. (location: page.html: footer newsletter signup form (id='wf-form-Newsletter-Signup-Form', method='get'))

high

social engineering

The footer copyright reads '@2024 Longbridge Research. All Rights Reseved.' — a completely unrelated entity with no connection to Magic Eden. This mismatch reveals the fraudulent operator while the rest of the page impersonates Magic Eden, indicating deliberate deception about the site's true ownership. (location: page.html: footer copyright div — '@2024 Longbridge Research. All Rights Reseved.')

high

malicious redirect

The top navigation bar and footer contain links pointing to the legitimate wallet.magiceden.io domain (e.g., 'https://wallet.magiceden.io/announcements') for the 'SOL network congestion' announcement. This mixed linking pattern lends false legitimacy to the phishing site while the primary call-to-action download links stay on the fraudulent domain. (location: page.html: top-bar link href='https://wallet.magiceden.io/announcements')

API

curl https://api.brin.sh/domain/wallet-magiceden-io.webflow.io

FAQ: how to interpret this assessment

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

Is wallet-magiceden-io.webflow.io safe for AI agents to use?

wallet-magiceden-io.webflow.io currently scores 47/100 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 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.