context safety score
A score of 39/100 indicates multiple risk signals were detected. This entity shows patterns commonly associated with malicious intent.
brand impersonation
Domain 'yts-official.cc' impersonates YTS (a well-known torrent/piracy brand). The use of 'yts-official' with a non-standard TLD (.cc) is a classic brand impersonation pattern designed to deceive users into believing this is an official YTS site. (location: domain: yts-official.cc)
malicious redirect
The 403 Forbidden page loads an external JavaScript file from '//www.ianqy.xyz/web.js' — a completely unrelated third-party domain injected into an Apache error page. This is a strong indicator of a compromised server or deliberate injection to execute malicious code on visitors' browsers, potentially used for redirects, credential harvesting, or drive-by attacks. (location: page.html:4 — <script src="//www.ianqy.xyz/web.js"></script>)
obfuscated code
External script 'web.js' is loaded from 'ianqy.xyz' — a domain with no apparent legitimate association to the site. Loading opaque external JS in an error page is a common technique to hide malicious payloads from static analysis, as the actual code is never stored on the scanned domain. (location: page.html:4 — src="//www.ianqy.xyz/web.js")
phishing
Combination of brand-impersonating domain (yts-official.cc) and injected third-party script suggests an infrastructure designed to phish users who expect a legitimate YTS site. The 403 page with injected JS may conditionally redirect or serve phishing content based on user-agent or referrer. (location: domain: yts-official.cc, page.html:4)
curl https://api.brin.sh/domain/yts-official.ccCommon questions teams ask before deciding whether to use this domain in agent workflows.
yts-official.cc currently scores 39/100 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.