Identity, reputation and domain-level evidence about the root domain. It does not automatically make every page safe.
Website trust score
A score is useful only with its evidence.
HIP uses a 0 to 100 result, but the number is never presented as a guarantee. Read it with the scan time, rule or policy version, evidence coverage, confidence, reasons and any mandatory risk cap.
Layered result
The components answer different questions.
Trust for the exact page or URL context, including supported phishing, redirect, form and reputation effects.
A content-risk layer for supported malware, script, download and phishing indicators. Follow the explanation because compatibility projections are normalized explicitly.
The safety-adjusted result after weighted evidence and mandatory constraints. It cannot erase a confirmed critical risk.
Interpretation
Confidence limits what HIP can claim.
Coverage and confidence
Coverage describes how much authoritative evidence HIP could use. Confidence describes its strength and agreement. Provider failure remains unavailable evidence, not a clean finding.
Uncertainty is a result
Unknown or thinly evidenced targets remain Limited Data instead of being promoted to trusted because no obvious warning was found.
Scores can change
A website, provider result, rule set or policy can change. Historical results retain their recorded context; a new scan applies current evidence and rules.
Appeals stay evidence-based
Published reasons make a finding contestable. The appeal process can correct a result or lead to a versioned rule change without silently rewriting history.
A high score is not a safety guarantee.
It means the checks HIP ran, with the evidence available at that time, supported the displayed result. Always consider the reasons and your own context.