context safety score
A score of 43/100 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
cloaking
Page conditionally redirects based on referrer or user-agent
brand impersonation
The page is served from domain wws8.com but all OG/Twitter meta tags, site_name, and title reference 'JiLi56.com', indicating the actual domain is masquerading under a different brand identity to deceive users and search engines. (location: page.html:8-16 (og:site_name, og:title, twitter:title, meta description))
credential harvesting
JavaScript reads 'token', 'account', 'password', and 'loginType' from IndexedDB (_ionicstorage/_ionickv) and transmits them via postMessage to a parent window with no origin validation (wildcard '*'). This enables cross-origin theft of stored credentials whenever the page is embedded in an attacker-controlled iframe. (location: page.html:77-98 (initAccount function, postMessage with '*' wildcard))
credential harvesting
The page also listens for inbound postMessage events with type 'fixToken' and writes token, account, password, and loginType values received from any origin into IndexedDB, allowing any parent frame to inject or overwrite stored credentials with no origin check. (location: page.html:88-97 (window.addEventListener message handler, setKeyToDb calls))
obfuscated code
window.__APP_CONFIG__.domainInfo contains a very long base64/custom-encoded string that is decoded and executed at runtime. The payload is not human-readable and conceals the application's actual configuration, routing, and potentially malicious redirect or tracking logic from static analysis. (location: page.html:21 (window.__APP_CONFIG__ = {"domainInfo":"=Q0NlQ0Nl..."}))
malicious redirect
The obfuscated domainInfo config likely controls dynamic domain routing. Combined with the brand mismatch (wws8.com serving JiLi56.com content) and iframe-detection logic, the site appears designed to redirect users or bots between domains depending on context, obscuring the true destination. (location: page.html:21-26 (window.__APP_CONFIG__, isInIframe URL parameter checks))
social engineering
Meta description and OG tags use high-pressure gambling enticement language ('hottest games in town', 'be the next lucky millionaire') to manipulate users into engaging with an online gambling platform, which may operate outside regulated jurisdictions. (location: page.html:1-4 (meta description, og:description))
hidden content
The page title tag is empty and the visible page text (page-text.txt) contains only legacy polyfill bootstrap code with no meaningful user-facing content, while all substantive content and branding is embedded in meta tags and a heavily obfuscated JS config blob — hiding the site's true purpose from casual inspection. (location: page.html:118 (empty <title>), page-text.txt:1)
curl https://api.brin.sh/domain/wws8.comCommon questions teams ask before deciding whether to use this domain in agent workflows.
wws8.com currently scores 43/100 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.