Identity
54
D
maxbet.rs
Posture Score: 67/100
Scanned May 17, 2026 at 11:11 AM UTC
Score History
Attack Surface
58
Reputation
88
Identity Findings
Weak DKIM RSA key (~1296 bits) for selector 'selector1'
RSA keys shorter than 2048 bits are considered weak. Current key is approximately 1296 bits.
💡 Generate a new 2048-bit (or larger) RSA key pair and update the DKIM record.
No MTA-STS record found
Without MTA-STS, mail transport encryption cannot be enforced and is vulnerable to downgrade attacks.
💡 Publish a _mta-sts TXT record and host a policy file at https://mta-sts.maxbet.rs/.well-known/mta-sts.txt
STARTTLS without MTA-STS or DANE protection
STARTTLS alone is vulnerable to downgrade attacks. Neither MTA-STS nor DANE is configured to enforce encryption.
💡 Deploy MTA-STS and/or DANE to protect against STARTTLS stripping attacks.
Generic ISP PTR hostname: esa.hc1869-46.eu.iphmx.com
The PTR record for 194.165.192.181 appears to be a generic ISP hostname, which can harm deliverability.
💡 Set a meaningful PTR record like mail.maxbet.rs
Generic ISP PTR hostname: esa.hc1869-46.eu.iphmx.com
The PTR record for 194.165.193.195 appears to be a generic ISP hostname, which can harm deliverability.
💡 Set a meaningful PTR record like mail.maxbet.rs
Generic ISP PTR hostname: esa.hc1869-46.eu.iphmx.com
The PTR record for 194.165.193.195 appears to be a generic ISP hostname, which can harm deliverability.
💡 Set a meaningful PTR record like mail.maxbet.rs
Generic ISP PTR hostname: esa.hc1869-46.eu.iphmx.com
The PTR record for 194.165.192.181 appears to be a generic ISP hostname, which can harm deliverability.
💡 Set a meaningful PTR record like mail.maxbet.rs
No CAA records found
No CAA records are configured. Any certificate authority can issue certificates for this domain.
💡 Add CAA records to restrict certificate issuance. Example: 0 issue "letsencrypt.org"
Multiple MX records but all resolve to same IP
All MX hostnames resolve to the same IP address, providing no actual redundancy.
💡 Point secondary MX records to a different server IP for true failover.
No TLS-RPT record found
Without TLS-RPT, you will not receive reports about TLS negotiation failures.
💡 Publish a _smtp._tls TXT record (e.g. "v=TLSRPTv1; rua=mailto:tls-reports@maxbet.rs").
ARC support not detected
No evidence of ARC (Authenticated Received Chain) support on MX servers. Forwarded messages may lose authentication.
💡 Consider enabling ARC signing on your mail servers to preserve authentication through forwarding.
Shared IP 194.165.192.181 used by multiple MX servers
The IP 194.165.192.181 is shared across 2 MX hostnames, reducing redundancy.
💡 Use unique IP addresses for each MX server for better redundancy.
Shared IP 194.165.193.195 used by multiple MX servers
The IP 194.165.193.195 is shared across 2 MX hostnames, reducing redundancy.
💡 Use unique IP addresses for each MX server for better redundancy.
Very low TTL on MX records: 282s
2 MX records have a TTL of 282s or less (below 300s).
💡 Increase the TTL to at least 300 seconds unless frequent changes are expected.
Very low TTL on TXT records: 11s
12 TXT records have a TTL of 11s or less (below 300s).
💡 Increase the TTL to at least 300 seconds unless frequent changes are expected.
Very low TTL on SPF record: 11s
The SPF record has a TTL of 11s or less (below 300s).
💡 Increase the TTL to at least 300 seconds unless frequent changes are expected.
Very low TTL on DMARC record: 11s
The DMARC record has a TTL of 11s or less (below 300s).
💡 Increase the TTL to at least 300 seconds unless frequent changes are expected.
NS TTL mismatch between parent and authoritative zone
The NS record TTL in the parent zone (~7199s) differs significantly from the authoritative zone (~86400s).
💡 Align NS record TTLs between the parent zone delegation and the authoritative zone.
SPF record is valid
The SPF record is properly configured with valid syntax and within lookup limits.
DKIM cryptographic configuration is compliant
No RFC 8301 compliance issues detected in DKIM key configuration.
DKIM key strength indicates modern key management
All DKIM keys use RSA-2048+ or Ed25519, consistent with current best practices.
No external DMARC report destinations
All DMARC report URIs point to the same domain — no external authorization needed.
Subdomains protected (sp=quarantine)
DMARC subdomain policy enforces quarantine or reject on unauthenticated subdomain mail.
No deprecated DMARCbis tags present
The DMARC record does not use any tags deprecated in DMARCbis (pct, rf, ri).
MX records are valid
All MX records are properly configured.
Meets bulk sender authentication requirements
Domain has SPF, DKIM, and DMARC — meeting Google/Yahoo 2024 bulk sender requirements for email authentication.
SMTP security checks passed
No open relay, VRFY/EXPN, or banner disclosure issues detected.
SMTP RFC 5321 compliance checks passed
The mail server accepts postmaster@ and abuse@ and uses a valid FQDN in EHLO.
IPv6 readiness is good
IPv6 records are present and properly configured.
NS delegation is properly configured
All nameservers are responsive, consistent, and properly secured.
DNS responses are consistent across all nameservers
All authoritative nameservers return consistent answers with proper AA flags.
SPF record is 265 bytes (multi-string TXT)
The SPF record exceeds 255 bytes and requires multi-string TXT encoding. Most modern resolvers handle this correctly.
DKIM2 not detected
No DKIM key record with v=2 was found across common selectors. DKIM2 is an emerging standard and not yet widely deployed.
DMARC alignment: adkim=r, aspf=r
DKIM alignment is relaxed, SPF alignment is relaxed.
DMARCbis np tag absent
The DMARC record does not include the np (non-existent subdomain policy) tag. Consider adding np=reject to protect non-existent subdomains under DMARCbis.
DMARCbis psd tag absent
The DMARC record does not include the psd (public suffix domain) indicator. Consider adding psd=n to explicitly identify this as an organizational domain.
REQUIRETLS not advertised
The primary MX does not advertise REQUIRETLS (RFC 8689). This is an emerging standard — MTA-STS and DANE provide adequate TLS enforcement for most deployments.
No DANE/TLSA records found
DANE is not configured for any MX server. This is optional but provides strong certificate binding.
No BIMI record found
BIMI is not configured. Your brand logo will not display in supporting email clients.
Open mail ports on mx1.hc1869-46.eu.iphmx.com
Detected open mail-related ports: 25
RFC 8058 one-click unsubscribe assessment
DKIM signing is configured. RFC 8058 compliance depends on List-Unsubscribe and List-Unsubscribe-Post headers being included in outbound messages and DKIM signatures.
MX IP network diversity
All MX IPs are in the same /16 network. Consider diversifying across networks for resilience.
SOA record parameters
Serial: 2402241692, Refresh: 10000s, Retry: 2400s, Expire: 604800s, Min TTL: 1800s
Attack Surface Findings
AXFR zone transfer allowed on
The nameserver allows AXFR zone transfers, exposing the complete zone contents to anyone. This is the most severe enumerability issue.
💡 Restrict AXFR transfers on to authorized secondary nameservers only using allow-transfer ACLs.
AXFR zone transfer allowed on
The nameserver allows AXFR zone transfers, exposing the complete zone contents to anyone. This is the most severe enumerability issue.
💡 Restrict AXFR transfers on to authorized secondary nameservers only using allow-transfer ACLs.
Domain enumerability: high
The domain is highly enumerable. Zone transfers, NSEC zone walking, or a combination of factors make it easy to discover all DNS records.
💡 Restrict zone transfers, use NSEC3 instead of NSEC, consider wildcard certificates to reduce CT log exposure, and implement rate limiting on DNS queries.
DNSSEC is not enabled
No DNSKEY or DS records were found. DNS responses are not cryptographically authenticated.
💡 Enable DNSSEC by generating DNSKEY records and publishing DS records at the registrar.
All MX records resolve correctly
No dangling MX records detected — all MX hostnames resolve to valid IP addresses.
Explicit MX records present
The domain has explicit MX records — no implicit A-record fallback delivery.
No internal information leakage detected
No non-routable IP addresses or internal references were found in public DNS records.
No excessive DNS information exposure detected
No HINFO, LOC, RP records, version disclosures, or zone walking vulnerabilities were found.
No email autodiscovery endpoints detected
No Microsoft Autodiscover, Mozilla Autoconfig, or email SRV records were found.
10 subdomain(s) discovered for maxbet.rs
Subdomains were enumerated via Certificate Transparency logs, DNS wordlist brute-forcing, and DNS record analysis.
0 certificate(s) found in CT logs
Certificate Transparency logs contain 0 certificate(s) for maxbet.rs and its subdomains. Each certificate reveals subdomain names.
Reputation Findings
Missing domain locks: clientTransferProhibited, clientDeleteProhibited
Domain maxbet.rs is missing protective locks: clientTransferProhibited, clientDeleteProhibited.
💡 Enable clientTransferProhibited and clientDeleteProhibited locks through your registrar to prevent unauthorized transfers or deletions.
Missing Strict-Transport-Security on maxbet.rs
The Strict-Transport-Security header is not set on https://maxbet.rs.
💡 Add the Strict-Transport-Security header with a max-age of at least 31536000 (1 year) and include the includeSubDomains directive.
security.txt present
Found security.txt at https://maxbet.rs/.well-known/security.txt.
TLS certificate valid for 145 days
Certificate for maxbet.rs expires on 2026-10-09.
Certificate issued by Sectigo Public Server Authentication CA DV R36
The certificate for maxbet.rs is issued by a third-party CA.
Signature algorithm: rsa-sha256
The certificate for maxbet.rs uses an acceptable signature algorithm.
RSA key: 4096 bits
The certificate for maxbet.rs uses an adequate RSA key of 4096 bits.
SCTs present in certificate
The certificate for maxbet.rs contains Signed Certificate Timestamps.
No weak ciphers detected
No known weak cipher suites detected on maxbet.rs.
Domain valid for 192 days
Domain maxbet.rs expires on 2026-11-25.
TLD has good reputation
The .rs TLD is not on known abuse watchlists.
DMARC reporting destinations look legitimate
DMARC rua/ruf addresses do not point to known URL shortener services.
MX records point to stable infrastructure
No MX records point to known dynamic DNS service domains.
Strong TLS configuration on primary MX
Primary MX (mx2.hc1869-46.eu.iphmx.com) uses TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 including Forward Secrecy.
SMTP banner matches infrastructure identity
The SMTP banner (esa.hc1869-46.eu.iphmx.com) aligns with the MX hostname (mx2.hc1869-46.eu.iphmx.com).
Google Safe Browsing DNS check — no flag detected
DNS-based Safe Browsing lookup returned no results. Full verification requires the Google Safe Browsing API key.
Abuse contact lookup failed
Could not query abuse contact information.
PhishTank — API key required
PhishTank phishing database check requires an API key.
Sender Score — API key required
Sender Score reputation check requires an API key.
Cisco Talos — API key required
Cisco Talos IP reputation check requires an API key.
Could not connect to webmail.maxbet.rs
HTTPS request to https://webmail.maxbet.rs failed or timed out.
WHOIS registration data
Registrar: Mainstream Public Cloud Services d.o.o. | Created: 2008-11-25 | Expires: 2026-11-25 | Updated: Unknown
WHOIS privacy protection not detected
Domain maxbet.rs does not appear to have WHOIS privacy protection. Registrant details may be publicly visible.
Typosquat detected: maxnet.rs (has MX!)
1 registered lookalike domain(s) that could be used for phishing against your brand. Domains with MX records can send and receive email, making them high-risk phishing vectors.
Dependency Chains
DMARC Authentication Chain (SPF)
DMARC uses SPF to verify that emails come from authorized servers
SPF Record
SPF record found and configured
→
DMARC Policy
DMARC policy: quarantine
DMARC Authentication Chain (DKIM)
DMARC uses DKIM to verify that emails have not been tampered with
DKIM Signature
DKIM signature missing
→
DMARC Policy
DMARC policy: quarantine
⚠️ DKIM signature is missing. DMARC relies on DKIM to verify email integrity and prevent tampering. Without DKIM, DMARC alignment will fail for cryptographic verification.
Mail Server Identity: mx1.hc1869-46.eu.iphmx.com
PTR record proves mail server legitimacy
MX: mx1.hc1869-46.eu.iphmx.com
Mail server at 194.165.192.181
→
PTR Record
Reverse DNS: 181.192.165.194.in-addr.arpa.eu.iphmx.com
Mail Server Identity: mx2.hc1869-46.eu.iphmx.com
PTR record proves mail server legitimacy
MX: mx2.hc1869-46.eu.iphmx.com
Mail server at 194.165.193.195
→
PTR Record
Reverse DNS: 195.193.165.194.in-addr.arpa.eu.iphmx.com
Mail Server Reputation: mx1.hc1869-46.eu.iphmx.com
RBL check ensures server is not blacklisted
MX: mx1.hc1869-46.eu.iphmx.com
Mail server at 194.165.192.181
→
RBL Status
Not blacklisted
Mail Server Reputation: mx2.hc1869-46.eu.iphmx.com
RBL check ensures server is not blacklisted
MX: mx2.hc1869-46.eu.iphmx.com
Mail server at 194.165.193.195
→
RBL Status
Not blacklisted
Enforced Encryption Chain
MTA-STS enforces TLS encryption to prevent man-in-the-middle attacks
TLS Support
Mail servers support TLS encryption
→
MTA-STS Policy
MTA-STS not configured
⚠️ MTA-STS policy is missing. Even with TLS support, you lack the enforcement layer that prevents attackers from stripping encryption (downgrade attacks).
Brand Identity Chain
BIMI displays your logo in email clients, but requires DMARC enforcement
DMARC Enforcement
DMARC policy: quarantine
→
BIMI Record
BIMI not configured
⚠️ BIMI record is missing. Even with DMARC enforcement, you need to configure BIMI to display your brand logo in supported email clients.
TLS Monitoring Chain
TLS-RPT provides reports about TLS connection failures
TLS Support
Mail servers support TLS encryption
→
TLS-RPT Reporting
TLS-RPT not configured
⚠️ TLS-RPT is not configured. Without TLS reporting, you have no visibility into TLS connection failures that may be impacting email delivery.
Security Checks
MX Records
✓
SPF Record
✓
DKIM Record
✗
DMARC Policy
✓
BIMI Record
✗
CAA Records
✗
DNSSEC
✗
MTA-STS
✗
TLS-RPT
✗
Embed Badge
Display your domain's security grade on your website or README:
<img src="https://scan.ractermx.com/badge/maxbet.rs.svg" alt="Email Security Grade">
Want to re-scan this domain for updated results?
Scan maxbet.rs Again