context safety score
A score of 36/100 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
brand impersonation
The page is served from withgoogle.com (not google.com) but renders a near-identical Google CAPTCHA/reCAPTCHA verification page with Google branding, Google's Terms of Service links, and a redirect continuing to https://www.google.com/. The domain 'withgoogle.com' is not an official Google domain and impersonates Google's infrastructure to appear legitimate. (location: metadata.json: domain=withgoogle.com; page.html: <title>https://www.google.com/</title>, links to //www.google.com/policies/terms/)
malicious redirect
The CAPTCHA form contains a hidden 'continue' field pointing to https://www.google.com/. After the user completes the CAPTCHA on the non-Google domain withgoogle.com, they are silently redirected. This is a classic redirect-after-interaction pattern used to harvest CAPTCHA completions or cookies before forwarding victims onward. (location: page.html line 17: <input type="hidden" name="continue" value="https://www.google.com/">)
credential harvesting
The form posts via HTTP POST to 'index' on withgoogle.com. It captures a reCAPTCHA enterprise response token (data-sitekey 6LfwuyUTAAAAAOAmoS0fdqijC2PbbdH4kjq62Y1b) and a hidden encoded token 'q'. Submitting the form sends these tokens to the operator of withgoogle.com, not to Google, enabling harvesting of verified human CAPTCHA tokens that can be replayed or sold. (location: page.html lines 7,15,17: form action='index', g-recaptcha data-sitekey, hidden input name='q')
social engineering
The page uses authoritative Google-branded language ('Our systems have detected unusual traffic', 'violation of the Terms of Service', 'malicious software') to pressure users into completing a CAPTCHA on a non-Google domain. This urgency and fear-based messaging is designed to bypass skepticism and compel interaction. (location: page.html lines 24,27: 'unusual traffic', 'violation of the Terms of Service', 'malicious software')
prompt injection
The page title is set to 'https://www.google.com/' rather than a descriptive page title. An AI agent browsing this URL and reading the page title or metadata could be misled into believing it has navigated to google.com, causing incorrect trust classification or downstream actions based on a spoofed origin context. (location: page.html line 3: <title>https://www.google.com/</title>)
curl https://api.brin.sh/domain/withgoogle.comCommon questions teams ask before deciding whether to use this domain in agent workflows.
withgoogle.com currently scores 36/100 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.