context safety score
A score of 40/100 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
malicious redirect
script/meta redirect patterns detected in page source
cloaking
Page uses meta refresh redirect
malicious redirect
The page contains an immediate META HTTP-EQUIV REFRESH with CONTENT="0;URL=http://wildapricot.com/" — a zero-second redirect from wildapricot.org to wildapricot.com over plain HTTP (not HTTPS). This silently forwards all visitors to a different domain before any content is rendered, and uses unencrypted HTTP for the destination. (location: page.html:20 — <META HTTP-EQUIV="REFRESH" CONTENT="0;URL=http://wildapricot.com/">)
credential harvesting
A fully functional login form collecting email and password is present on wildapricot.org, which immediately redirects to wildapricot.com. Credentials entered before the redirect completes (or by agents/browsers that don't follow the redirect) are submitted to https://wildapricot.org/Sys/Login. The .org domain is a reserved/placeholder site — not the canonical product domain — making this form anomalous and suspicious for credential collection. (location: page.html:204 — <form method="post" action="https://wildapricot.org/Sys/Login">)
brand impersonation
The site at wildapricot.org presents itself as the legitimate Wild Apricot membership software product (logo, 'Powered by Wild Apricot Membership Software' branding, OAuth login buttons for Google/Microsoft/Apple), yet the page title is 'Reserved domain names — Home' and the footer copyright reads '© Reserved domain names', indicating this is not an official Wild Apricot property. The use of official branding on a reserved/squatted domain constitutes brand impersonation. (location: page.html:19 (<title>), page.html:386 (footer copyright), page.html:406 (Powered by Wild Apricot))
social engineering
The page presents OAuth login buttons for Google, Microsoft, and Apple alongside a username/password form on a domain ('Reserved domain names') that is not the canonical Wild Apricot service. Users or AI agents navigating to wildapricot.org would be presented with trusted identity-provider login prompts in a misleading context, potentially inducing credential submission to a non-authoritative domain. (location: page.html:182-191 — OAuth login links for GooglePlus, Microsoft, Apple)
malicious redirect
All internal and footer links (e.g., 'Powered by Wild Apricot', content image link) point to http://www.wildapricot.com over plain HTTP rather than HTTPS, facilitating potential downgrade or man-in-the-middle interception on outbound navigation. (location: page.html:320, page.html:406 — href="http://www.wildapricot.com")
curl https://api.brin.sh/domain/wildapricot.orgCommon questions teams ask before deciding whether to use this domain in agent workflows.
wildapricot.org currently scores 40/100 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.