Saved technical finding; details are available in the evidence.
NoticeCross-check the authoritative DNS zone and affected records with a second resolver.
View finding and evidencedns.wildcard_detected
Email assessment · methodology v4
Check email infrastructure
The score assesses DNS foundations, email authentication and mail transport only. Websites, HTTP headers, HTML basics and blocklists do not affect email score, rating, coverage or weekly ranking.
Enter only the domain, for example example.com — without https://, a path or an email address.
Each domain can be checked at most once every five minutes. Opening this page does not start a check; anonymous SMTP, mailbox and port scans are excluded. Completed public checks may appear temporarily in the weekly overview with the domain, rating and time. Verified owners can withdraw visibility.Stored check results
firemail.de
firemail.deAAA98/100
Coverage 100 %
Assessment profile
public-email-trust-v4
Requested (UTC)
04.11.2026 12:43:56
Earliest refresh (UTC)
04.11.2026 12:48:56
Email findings to review
Specific deviations and unresolved checks from this saved snapshot. Affected fields are shown directly with each finding.
The DMARC record is valid and also requests forensic failure reports, which Sendequelle does not process.
NoticeCheck whether ruf and fo are needed and whether the recipient handles these sensitive reports in accordance with privacy requirements.
View finding and evidencedmarc.failure_reporting_configured
No optional BIMI record is published.
NoticeReview the effective SPF, DMARC or BIMI record against the finding code and correct it in a controlled way.
View finding and evidencebimi.not_configured
Three email assessment categories
Open methodologyWhat was assessed?
Unavailable areas are explicitly identified and never treated as passed.
Domain and DNS
98/100Nameservers, records, DNSSEC and basic DNS configuration.
Coverage100 % · 2 checks
1 passed1 review0 unresolved
Email authentication
97/100SPF, DMARC and publicly verifiable sender rules.
Coverage100 % · 3 checks
1 passed2 review0 unresolved
Mail servers and transport
100/100MX and TLS reporting policies without anonymous port scans.
Coverage100 % · 3 checks
3 passed0 review0 unresolved
Email infrastructure in detail
Which systems receive mail — and which may send it?
Receiving MX servers and outgoing senders are identified separately from the stored DNS evidence.
Mail routes published in DNS
Public DNS evidence
Inbound and outbound mail, shown separately
MX shows where incoming messages go. SPF shows which networks may send for the domain.
Incoming mail
MX targets
mx1.firemail.de Priority 10
IP targets
178.63.251.174 Outgoing mail
SPF-authorized sources
v=spf1 mx a:mail.firemail.de a:firemail.at a:firemail.eu ip4:188.40.70.221 ip4:188.40.70.237 a:firemail.de a:mail.emailn.de ip4:46.182.18.10 ip4:88.99.254.36 -all MX
Default domain target Published by
firemail.deSPF authorizes the public addresses of the MX targets.
A
mail.firemail.de Published by
firemail.deSPF authorizes the public A/AAAA addresses of the named host.
A
firemail.at Published by
firemail.deSPF authorizes the public A/AAAA addresses of the named host.
A
firemail.eu Published by
firemail.deSPF authorizes the public A/AAAA addresses of the named host.
IP4
188.40.70.221 Published by
firemail.deThis IPv4 address or network is explicitly authorized as a sender by SPF.
IP4
188.40.70.237 Published by
firemail.deThis IPv4 address or network is explicitly authorized as a sender by SPF.
A
firemail.de Published by
firemail.deSPF authorizes the public A/AAAA addresses of the named host.
A
mail.emailn.de Published by
firemail.deSPF authorizes the public A/AAAA addresses of the named host.
IP4
46.182.18.10 Published by
firemail.deThis IPv4 address or network is explicitly authorized as a sender by SPF.
IP4
88.99.254.36 Published by
firemail.deThis IPv4 address or network is explicitly authorized as a sender by SPF.
Resolved sending endpoints and hostnames
For each individual public sending IP, its PTR name is resolved and forward-checked against the same IP.
178.63.251.174FCrDNS confirmed SPF origin
firemail.de · MX-ADDRESS PTR names and hostnames
emg.emailn.de
Confirmed: emg.emailn.de
188.40.70.221FCrDNS confirmed SPF origin
firemail.de · IP4firemail.de · Afiremail.de · Afiremail.de · Afiremail.de · A PTR names and hostnames
mail.firemail.de
Confirmed: mail.firemail.de
188.40.70.237FCrDNS confirmed SPF origin
firemail.de · IP4 PTR names and hostnames
send.firemail.de
Confirmed: send.firemail.de
46.182.18.10FCrDNS confirmed SPF origin
firemail.de · IP4 PTR names and hostnames
pmg2.emailn.de
Confirmed: pmg2.emailn.de
46.182.21.2FCrDNS confirmed SPF origin
firemail.de · A PTR names and hostnames
mail.emailn.de
Confirmed: mail.emailn.de
88.99.254.36FCrDNS confirmed SPF origin
firemail.de · IP4 PTR names and hostnames
relay.emailn.de
Confirmed: relay.emailn.de
MX targets describe inbound mail. SPF describes authorized sending sources. A hostname such as mail.example.org is identified as an outbound server only when stored DNS, SPF or monitoring evidence establishes that role.
Email authentication in detail
DMARC record explained in full
The record, protection, tag values, effective defaults and external report authorisation from this check.
DMARC record found
DNS query:
_dmarc.firemail.de
DMARC-compliant with a notice. The record is usable. Review the notices explained below.
Effective policy:
p=reject
v=DMARC1; p=reject; rua=mailto:d-yt1nwktoquklrgdn5sdvisuyg5xrwgon@reports.sendequelle.com; ruf=mailto:postmaster@firemail.de; sp=reject; adkim=r; aspf=r
Protection
What protection does this record provide?
Compliance, policy effect, reporting and alignment are assessed separately.
Record and syntax
Valid and unique
Version, order, separators and values were read as an applicable DMARC record.
Protection for the domain
Reject (p=reject) – highest protection
Messages that fail alignment should be rejected.
Protection for subdomains
Reject (p=reject) – highest protection
Messages that fail alignment should be rejected.
Aggregate reports
Configured and authorized
At least one rua recipient is configured; external destinations were checked using the required DNS authorization.
DKIM alignment
Relaxed
The same organizational domain is sufficient. This complies with DMARC and is the standardized default.
SPF alignment
Relaxed
The same organizational domain is sufficient. This complies with DMARC and is the standardized default.
What do the individual settings mean?
Every explicit tag and default value is explained with its source, assessment and effect.
| Tag | Value | Assessment | Meaning |
|---|---|---|---|
vProtocol version |
DMARC1Set in the record |
Valid | Correct DMARC version; must appear first. |
pDomain policy |
rejectSet in the record |
Valid | Messages that fail alignment should be rejected. |
ruaAggregate report recipients |
mailto:d-yt1nwktoquklrgdn5sdvisuyg5xrwgon@reports.sendequelle.comSet in the record |
Valid | Recipients send aggregate DMARC reports to these destinations. |
rufFailure report recipients |
mailto:postmaster@firemail.deSet in the record |
Valid | Forensic failure reports may be sent to these destinations; Sendequelle does not process them in the MVP. |
spSubdomain policy |
rejectSet in the record |
Valid | Separate policy for subdomains. |
adkimDKIM alignment |
rSet in the record |
Valid | Relaxed DKIM alignment: the same organizational domain is sufficient. |
aspfSPF alignment |
rSet in the record |
Valid | Relaxed SPF alignment: the same organizational domain is sufficient. |
Report recipient authorization
mailto:d-yt1nwktoquklrgdn5sdvisuyg5xrwgon@reports.sendequelle.com
Externally authorized
From the result to the cause
Email findings and evidence
Each finding shows its assessment, impact, recommended action and the stored values on which it is based.
Domain and DNS
NoticeSaved technical finding; details are available in the evidence.
dns.wildcard_detected Why does this matter?
DNS deviations can affect availability and the reliability of dependent services.
Next useful step
Cross-check the authoritative DNS zone and affected records with a second resolver.
How this finding was determined (12 saved facts)
| Section | Property | Observed value |
|---|---|---|
| Check run | Checker version | 1.0.0 |
| Check run | Check duration | 219 ms |
| Observed | Domain | firemail.de |
| Observed | Wildcard detected | Yes |
| Observed | Query name hash | 82c450cab904227972a7255684772a158a69efd44b42e5417fc81084258b73c3 |
| Observed | Addresses | 188.40.70.221 |
| Observed | Lowest TTL | 86.400 seconds (24 hours) |
| Observed | Query name hash | 9291a36d5ac4a7adfb7d83a93a6eff7ac1cb122672a8bcb0737907472f4be5ef |
| Observed | Addresses | 188.40.70.221 |
| Observed | Lowest TTL | 86.400 seconds (24 hours) |
| Expected | Wildcard detected | No |
| Technical evidence | Probe count | 2 |
Email authentication
NoticeThe DMARC record is valid and also requests forensic failure reports, which Sendequelle does not process.
dmarc.failure_reporting_configured Why does this matter?
ruf/fo may trigger additional sensitive reports about individual messages. Sendequelle does not receive or analyze these reports in the MVP.
Next useful step
Check whether ruf and fo are needed and whether the recipient handles these sensitive reports in accordance with privacy requirements.
How this finding was determined (32 saved facts)
| Section | Property | Observed value |
|---|---|---|
| Check run | Checker version | 1.0.0 |
| Check run | Check duration | 1397 ms |
| Observed | Domain | firemail.de |
| Observed | DNS lookup location | _dmarc.firemail.de |
| Observed | Policy domain | firemail.de |
| Observed | Organizational domain | firemail.de |
| Observed | Discovery | direct |
| Observed | Raw | v=DMARC1; p=reject; rua=mailto:d-yt1nwktoquklrgdn5sdvisuyg5xrwgon@reports.sendequelle.com; ruf=mailto:postmaster@firemail.de; sp=reject; adkim=r; aspf=r |
| Observed | V | DMARC1 |
| Observed | P | reject |
| Observed | Rua | mailto:d-yt1nwktoquklrgdn5sdvisuyg5xrwgon@reports.sendequelle.com |
| Observed | Ruf | mailto:postmaster@firemail.de |
| Observed | Sp | reject |
| Observed | Adkim | r |
| Observed | Aspf | r |
| Observed | Aggregate uris | mailto:d-yt1nwktoquklrgdn5sdvisuyg5xrwgon@reports.sendequelle.com |
| Observed | Failure uris | mailto:postmaster@firemail.de |
| Observed | Effective policy | reject |
| Observed | Policy fallback | No |
| Observed | Fingerprint | 9c33a3870684ddf59a4ec1b039260abfb2b51413bb93bea91bc23fc315ce6bba |
| Observed | Applied policy | reject |
| Observed | Uri | mailto:d-yt1nwktoquklrgdn5sdvisuyg5xrwgon@reports.sendequelle.com |
| Observed | Destination host | reports.sendequelle.com |
| Observed | External | Yes |
| Observed | Status | authorized |
| Observed | DNS lookup location | firemail.de._report._dmarc.reports.sendequelle.com |
| Observed | Lowest TTL | 300 seconds |
| Observed | Lowest TTL | 300 seconds |
| Observed | Status | info |
| Observed | Code | dmarc.failure_reporting_configured |
| Observed | Domain | firemail.de |
| Observed | Ingestion | No |
Email authentication
NoticeNo optional BIMI record is published.
bimi.not_configured Why does this matter?
Incomplete policies can affect spoofing protection, report reception or deliverability.
Next useful step
Review the effective SPF, DMARC or BIMI record against the finding code and correct it in a controlled way.
How this finding was determined (32 saved facts)
| Section | Property | Observed value |
|---|---|---|
| Check run | Checker version | 2.0.0 |
| Check run | Check duration | 247 ms |
| Observed | Domain | firemail.de |
| Observed | Selector | default |
| Observed | DNS lookup location | default._bimi.firemail.de |
| Observed | Number of records found | 0 |
| Observed | DNSSEC status | secure |
| Observed | Lowest TTL | 21.600 seconds (6 hours) |
| Expected | Optional | Yes |
| Expected | Selector | default |
| Expected | Https logo | Yes |
| Technical evidence | Adapter | App\Domain\Monitoring\Dns\Consensus\DigTxtResolver |
| Technical evidence | DNS lookup location | default._bimi.firemail.de |
| Technical evidence | Minimum agreement | 2 |
| Technical evidence | Name | google |
| Technical evidence | Server | 8.8.8.8 |
| Technical evidence | Transport | tls |
| Technical evidence | Tls hostname | dns.google |
| Technical evidence | Status | secure |
| Technical evidence | Reason | authenticated_data |
| Technical evidence | Exit code | 0 |
| Technical evidence | Timed out | No |
| Technical evidence | Response status | NOERROR |
| Technical evidence | Authenticated data | Yes |
| Technical evidence | Flags | qr, rd, ra, ad |
| Technical evidence | Check duration | 105 |
| Technical evidence | Number of records found | 1 |
| Technical evidence | Record fingerprint | 4c8497c3defc666e4ae0d736de86680046bbdfa83b2cb5f5ff5565aa0641922e |
| Technical evidence | Lowest TTL | 21.600 seconds (6 hours) |
| Technical evidence | Name | cloudflare |
| Technical evidence | Server | 1.1.1.1 |
| Technical evidence | Transport | tls |
Domain and DNS
PassedDNS and MX infrastructure is consistent
dns.infrastructure_ok Why does this matter?
Nameservers, SOA, MX targets and DNSSEC were evaluated without a higher-priority error.
Next useful step
Keep the configuration and monitor changes.
How this finding was determined (32 saved facts)
| Section | Property | Observed value |
|---|---|---|
| Check run | Checker version | 3.0.0 |
| Check run | Check duration | 480 ms |
| Observed | Resolver used | system-recursive |
| Observed | Nameservers | ns1.nbiserv.de, ns2.nbiserv.de, ns3.nbiserv.de, ns4.nbiserv.de |
| Observed | Mname | ns.nbiserv.de |
| Observed | Rname | hostmaster.nbiserv.de |
| Observed | Serial | 2026050836 |
| Observed | Refresh | 86400 |
| Observed | Retry | 7200 |
| Observed | Expire | 2419200 |
| Observed | Minimum ttl | 7200 |
| Observed | Priority | 10 |
| Observed | Target | mx1.firemail.de |
| Observed | Domain addresses | 188.40.70.221 |
| Observed | Addresses | 178.63.251.174 |
| Observed | Status | secure |
| Observed | Reason | resolver_consensus_secure |
| Expected | Nameservers | at_least_two |
| Expected | Soa | present |
| Expected | Mx | valid_or_null_mx |
| Expected | Mx addresses | public_only |
| Expected | Dnssec | secure_or_explicitly_insecure |
| Technical evidence | Adapter | App\Domain\Monitoring\Dns\Dnssec\DigDnssecValidator |
| Technical evidence | Domain | firemail.de |
| Technical evidence | Minimum agreement | 2 |
| Technical evidence | Name | google |
| Technical evidence | Server | 8.8.8.8 |
| Technical evidence | Transport | tls |
| Technical evidence | Tls hostname | dns.google |
| Technical evidence | Status | secure |
| Technical evidence | Reason | authenticated_data |
| Technical evidence | Exit code | 0 |
Email authentication
PassedSPF policy is consistent
spf.policy_valid Why does this matter?
The record and its statically resolvable dependencies are within the evaluated limits.
Next useful step
Continue monitoring changes to sending services and includes.
How this finding was determined (32 saved facts)
| Section | Property | Observed value |
|---|---|---|
| Check run | Checker version | 3.0.0 |
| Check run | Check duration | 369 ms |
| Observed | Domain | firemail.de |
| Observed | Raw | v=spf1 mx a:mail.firemail.de a:firemail.at a:firemail.eu ip4:188.40.70.221 ip4:188.40.70.237 a:firemail.de a:mail.emailn.de ip4:46.182.18.10 ip4:88.99.254.36 -all |
| Observed | Qualifier | + |
| Observed | Name | mx |
| Observed | Qualifier | + |
| Observed | Name | a |
| Observed | Argument | mail.firemail.de |
| Observed | Qualifier | + |
| Observed | Name | a |
| Observed | Argument | firemail.at |
| Observed | Qualifier | + |
| Observed | Name | a |
| Observed | Argument | firemail.eu |
| Observed | Qualifier | + |
| Observed | Name | ip4 |
| Observed | Argument | 188.40.70.221 |
| Observed | Qualifier | + |
| Observed | Name | ip4 |
| Observed | Argument | 188.40.70.237 |
| Observed | Qualifier | + |
| Observed | Name | a |
| Observed | Argument | firemail.de |
| Observed | Qualifier | + |
| Observed | Name | a |
| Observed | Argument | mail.emailn.de |
| Observed | Qualifier | + |
| Observed | Name | ip4 |
| Observed | Argument | 46.182.18.10 |
| Observed | Qualifier | + |
| Observed | Name | ip4 |
Mail servers and transport
PassedMTA-STS policy is consistent
mta.policy_valid Why does this matter?
The TXT announcement, HTTPS policy and MX coverage were evaluated successfully.
Next useful step
Monitor the policy ID and certificates when making changes.
How this finding was determined (32 saved facts)
| Section | Property | Observed value |
|---|---|---|
| Check run | Checker version | 1.0.0 |
| Check run | Check duration | 220 ms |
| Observed | Domain | firemail.de |
| Observed | DNS lookup location | _mta-sts.firemail.de |
| Observed | Policy host | mta-sts.firemail.de |
| Observed | Version | STSv1 |
| Observed | Fingerprint | 4ba1aa680ac9c8289f135345368a623833511007559016847b88f4064c4e186e |
| Observed | Version | STSv1 |
| Observed | Mode | testing |
| Observed | Mx | filter.emailn.de, mx1.firemail.de |
| Observed | Max age | 86400 |
| Observed | Body sha256 | 4f500b373930b27b661207e494bf002c0e2692847fcb80cc4c5b9ecb4af5a0eb |
| Observed | Mx hosts | mx1.firemail.de |
| Expected | Policy required | No |
| Expected | Url | https://mta-sts.firemail.de/.well-known/mta-sts.txt |
| Expected | Redirects | 0 |
| Expected | Https port | 443 |
| Expected | Max bytes | 65536 |
| Technical evidence | Adapter | App\Domain\Monitoring\MtaSts\NativeMtaStsDnsResolver |
| Technical evidence | Resolver used | system-recursive |
| Technical evidence | DNS lookup location | _mta-sts.firemail.de |
| Technical evidence | Txt record count | 1 |
| Technical evidence | Mx hosts | mx1.firemail.de |
| Technical evidence | Adapter | App\Domain\Monitoring\MtaSts\PinnedMtaStsPolicyFetcher |
| Technical evidence | Policy host | mta-sts.firemail.de |
| Technical evidence | Path | /.well-known/mta-sts.txt |
| Technical evidence | Resolved addresses | 188.40.70.221 |
| Technical evidence | Selected address | 188.40.70.221 |
| Technical evidence | Ip family | ipv4 |
| Technical evidence | Final HTTP status | 200 |
| Technical evidence | Content type | text/plain |
| Technical evidence | Response bytes | 88 |
Mail servers and transport
PassedTLS-RPT policy is consistent
tlsrpt.policy_valid Why does this matter?
The record and reporting destinations were evaluated syntactically and semantically.
Next useful step
Monitor incoming reports and policy changes.
How this finding was determined (32 saved facts)
| Section | Property | Observed value |
|---|---|---|
| Check run | Checker version | 2.0.0 |
| Check run | Check duration | 226 ms |
| Observed | Domain | firemail.de |
| Observed | DNS lookup location | _smtp._tls.firemail.de |
| Observed | Number of records found | 1 |
| Observed | Raw | v=TLSRPTv1; rua=mailto:postmaster@firemail.de |
| Observed | V | TLSRPTv1 |
| Observed | Rua | mailto:postmaster@firemail.de |
| Observed | Aggregate uris | mailto:postmaster@firemail.de |
| Observed | Fingerprint | 573fdca8b7e532e41c9684a56a481f7ef316cb294673a5cfbf781bd4ce39fe5f |
| Observed | Lowest TTL | 3.600 seconds (1 hours) |
| Observed | DNSSEC status | secure |
| Expected | Number of records found | 1 |
| Expected | Policy required | No |
| Technical evidence | Adapter | App\Domain\Monitoring\Dns\Consensus\DigTxtResolver |
| Technical evidence | DNS lookup location | _smtp._tls.firemail.de |
| Technical evidence | Minimum agreement | 2 |
| Technical evidence | Name | google |
| Technical evidence | Server | 8.8.8.8 |
| Technical evidence | Transport | tls |
| Technical evidence | Tls hostname | dns.google |
| Technical evidence | Status | secure |
| Technical evidence | Reason | authenticated_data |
| Technical evidence | Exit code | 0 |
| Technical evidence | Timed out | No |
| Technical evidence | Response status | NOERROR |
| Technical evidence | Authenticated data | Yes |
| Technical evidence | Flags | qr, rd, ra, ad |
| Technical evidence | Check duration | 91 |
| Technical evidence | Number of records found | 1 |
| Technical evidence | Record fingerprint | 199545f4fd3fb43fc0203f53707a8312cca225b96c3c11317d46b6622f0bdd78 |
| Technical evidence | Lowest TTL | 3.600 seconds (1 hours) |
Mail servers and transport
PassedThe MX RRset and the SMTP TLSA policies of every MX host are DNSSEC validated. No certificate matching was performed by this public check.
public.dane_policy_published Why does this matter?
The public check assesses DNSSEC and published TLSA policies at all MX targets. It does not match the current SMTP certificate.
Next useful step
Continue monitoring TLSA and certificate changes for your verified domain.
How this finding was determined (32 saved facts)
| Section | Property | Observed value |
|---|---|---|
| Check run | Checker version | 1.0.0 |
| Check run | Check duration | 395 ms |
| Observed | Domain | firemail.de |
| Observed | DNS lookup location | firemail.de |
| Observed | Mx hosts | mx1.firemail.de |
| Observed | Mx dnssec status | secure |
| Observed | Hostname | mx1.firemail.de |
| Observed | DNS lookup location | _25._tcp.mx1.firemail.de |
| Observed | DNSSEC status | secure |
| Observed | State | published |
| Observed | Usage | 3 |
| Observed | Selector | 1 |
| Observed | Matching type | 1 |
| Observed | Association sha256 | 166608d46c59da16146ddd32383a886a074619ebd62a4f3cb019d046b392161f |
| Observed | Record fingerprint | 5244f514fd34d2bcf5bbfb01b05a11e95d18ac707810319b059bcbd4367b745a |
| Observed | Record found | 3 1 1 22c340df62685ea3ba6c00d1b8750e1d4d6590f01fc946c3664da1618e6d85e9 |
| Observed | Smtp usable | Yes |
| Observed | Lowest TTL | 1.876 seconds |
| Observed | Reason | resolver_consensus_secure |
| Observed | Policy state | published |
| Expected | Mx dnssec | secure |
| Expected | Tlsa dnssec | secure |
| Expected | Smtp port | 25 |
| Expected | Tlsa coverage | all_mx |
| Expected | Certificate match | authorised_monitor_only |
| Technical evidence | Performed | No |
| Technical evidence | Reason | anonymous_public_tool_boundary |
| Technical evidence | Certificate match | not_checked |
| Technical evidence | Query type | MX |
| Technical evidence | Minimum agreement | 2 |
| Technical evidence | Name | google |
| Technical evidence | Server | 8.8.8.8 |
Supplementary information with no effect on the email assessment
Website, HTTP security headers, HTML basics and blocklists are shown separately. Their local warnings are not email score deductions.
Web security headers
Improvement recommendedBasic web security headers are missing or not unambiguously effective.
public.headers_incompleteSupplementary finding · no score effect
Specifically affected
- Missing or not effective:
Content-Security-Policy - Missing or not effective:
Content-Security-Policy: frame-ancestors / X-Frame-Options - Missing or not effective:
Referrer-Policy - Missing or not effective:
Permissions-Policy
Why does this matter?
Missing browser protection directives increase the website attack surface.
Next useful step
Add missing headers on the server; validate CSP in report-only mode first.
How this finding was determined (5 saved facts)
| Section | Property | Observed value |
|---|---|---|
| Specifically affected | Missing or not effective | Content-Security-Policy |
| Specifically affected | Missing or not effective | Content-Security-Policy: frame-ancestors / X-Frame-Options |
| Specifically affected | Missing or not effective | Referrer-Policy |
| Specifically affected | Missing or not effective | Permissions-Policy |
| Check run | Checker version | 2.0.0 |
| Technical evidence | Analyzed destination page | https://firemail.de/ |
| Technical evidence | Present | hsts, nosniff |
| Technical evidence | Missing | csp, frame_protection, referrer_policy, permissions_policy |
| Technical evidence | Checked properties | 6 |
HTML basics
NoticeSome automatically checked HTML basics are missing.
public.accessibility_basics_incompleteSupplementary finding · no score effect
Why does this matter?
Missing HTML basics can reduce usability and machine readability.
Next useful step
Add the document language, title, viewport, a clear H1 and a main landmark.
How this finding was determined (6 saved facts)
| Section | Property | Observed value |
|---|---|---|
| Check run | Checker version | 2.0.0 |
| Technical evidence | Analyzed destination page | https://firemail.de/ |
| Technical evidence | Present | language, title, viewport, single_h1 |
| Technical evidence | Missing | main_landmark |
| Technical evidence | Checked properties | 5 |
| Technical evidence | Complete WCAG audit | No |
Blocklists and reputation
Not assessedThe blocklist provider did not return a reliable assessment.
public.reputation_unavailableSupplementary finding · no score effect
Why does this matter?
No blocklist or reputation rating is claimed without reliable provider evidence.
Next useful step
The operator should check provider configuration and availability before repeating this assessment.
How this finding was determined (32 saved facts)
| Section | Property | Observed value |
|---|---|---|
| Check run | Checker version | 3.0.0 |
| Observed | IP address | 178.63.251.174 |
| Observed | Ip family | ipv4 |
| Observed | Reputation provider | multi-provider |
| Observed | Provider status | unavailable |
| Observed | Complete | No |
| Observed | Checked at | 2026-11-04T12:44:04+00:00 |
| Observed | Checked lists | 0 |
| Observed | Lists with a match | 0 |
| Observed | Unavailable lists | 5 |
| Observed | Policy advisories | 0 |
| Observed | Key | spamhaus_zen |
| Observed | Name | Spamhaus ZEN |
| Observed | Status | unavailable |
| Observed | Category | unknown |
| Observed | Checked at | 2026-11-04T12:44:04+00:00 |
| Observed | Source | https://www.spamhaus.org/blocklists/zen-blocklist/ |
| Observed | Delisting url | https://check.spamhaus.org/ |
| Observed | Reason code | provider_disabled |
| Observed | Key | abusix_guardian |
| Observed | Name | Abusix Guardian |
| Observed | Status | unavailable |
| Observed | Category | unknown |
| Observed | Checked at | 2026-11-04T12:44:04+00:00 |
| Observed | Source | https://abusix.com/guardian/ |
| Observed | Delisting url | https://lookup.abusix.com/ |
| Observed | Reason code | provider_disabled |
| Observed | Key | spamcop |
| Observed | Name | SpamCop Blocking List |
| Observed | Status | unavailable |
| Observed | Category | unknown |
| Observed | Checked at | 2026-11-04T12:44:04+00:00 |
Website and TLS
PassedThe HTTPS connection was successfully verified.
public.https_verifiedSupplementary finding · no score effect
Why does this matter?
This check did not identify a specific deficiency.
Next useful step
Keep the configuration and check it again regularly.
How this finding was determined (13 saved facts)
| Section | Property | Observed value |
|---|---|---|
| Check run | Checker version | 2.0.0 |
| Technical evidence | Requested URL | https://firemail.de/ |
| Technical evidence | Final URL | https://firemail.de/ |
| Technical evidence | Validated destination host | firemail.de |
| Technical evidence | Final HTTP status | 200 |
| Technical evidence | Ip family | ipv4 |
| Technical evidence | Certificate and hostname verified | Yes |
| Technical evidence | TLS protocol | TLSv1.3 |
| Technical evidence | TLS cipher | TLS_AES_256_GCM_SHA384 |
| Technical evidence | Certificate valid until | 2026-12-23T21:55:01+00:00 |
| Technical evidence | Certificate time remaining | 49 |
| Technical evidence | Check duration | 55 |
| Technical evidence | Safely followed redirects | 0 |
Website connection in detail
Understand the HTTPS and TLS assessment
Final status, certificate verification, negotiated connection and every safely followed redirect from this snapshot.
Measured HTTPS connection
Safe external check
TLS, certificate and redirect destination
Every displayed assessment is based on this saved check.
Final HTTPS status
HTTP 200
The safely followed destination was reachable.
Certificate and hostname
Verified
The certificate chain and hostname binding were accepted for this specific HTTPS connection.
Negotiated protocol
TLSv1.3
Measured on the final HTTPS connection; this does not describe every supported protocol.
Negotiated cipher suite
TLS_AES_256_GCM_SHA384
This is the cipher suite of this connection, not a complete cipher suite scan.
Certificate time remaining
49 days
Recorded expiry: 2026-12-23T21:55:01+00:00
Redirect chain
0 redirects
The requested HTTPS address was the final destination without a redirect.
Safely followed path
https://firemail.de/
Scope limit: The assessment covers the safely resolved, IP-pinned HTTPS connection to the final home page. It is not a complete test of all cipher suites, key types, TLS versions, PQC methods or other ports.
Blocklists and IP reputation
Partially evaluated
Which mail IP was checked against which lists?
Inbound MX addresses and publicly discoverable SPF sender addresses are shown separately. DKIM does not identify sending IPs; private DMARC sources are not used in this public check.
6
Mail IP addresses
0
Selected lists
0
Confirmed hits
30
Unavailable
178.63.251.174
MX mx1.firemail.deSPF-autorisierte Sender-IP multi-provider
Incomplete
| Data source | Classification | Result | Check details | Actions |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Abusix Guardian | Technical data source | Unavailable | No approved data provider is available for this query. The operator must configure and approve the provider; retrying alone does not close this gap. | Source Open Abusix Guardian in a new window Appeal / delisting Open Abusix Guardian in a new window |
| Barracuda Reputation Block List | Technical data source | Unavailable | No approved data provider is available for this query. The operator must configure and approve the provider; retrying alone does not close this gap. | Source Open Barracuda Reputation Block List in a new window Appeal / delisting Open Barracuda Reputation Block List in a new window |
| SpamCop Blocking List | Technical data source | Unavailable | No approved data provider is available for this query. The operator must configure and approve the provider; retrying alone does not close this gap. | Source Open SpamCop Blocking List in a new window Appeal / delisting Open SpamCop Blocking List in a new window |
| SpamRATS | Technical data source | Unavailable | No approved data provider is available for this query. The operator must configure and approve the provider; retrying alone does not close this gap. | Source Open SpamRATS in a new window Appeal / delisting Open SpamRATS in a new window |
| Spamhaus ZEN | Technical data source | Unavailable | No approved data provider is available for this query. The operator must configure and approve the provider; retrying alone does not close this gap. | Source Open Spamhaus ZEN in a new window Appeal / delisting Open Spamhaus ZEN in a new window |
188.40.70.221
SPF-autorisierte Sender-IP multi-provider
Incomplete
| Data source | Classification | Result | Check details | Actions |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Abusix Guardian | Technical data source | Unavailable | No approved data provider is available for this query. The operator must configure and approve the provider; retrying alone does not close this gap. | Source Open Abusix Guardian in a new window Appeal / delisting Open Abusix Guardian in a new window |
| Barracuda Reputation Block List | Technical data source | Unavailable | No approved data provider is available for this query. The operator must configure and approve the provider; retrying alone does not close this gap. | Source Open Barracuda Reputation Block List in a new window Appeal / delisting Open Barracuda Reputation Block List in a new window |
| SpamCop Blocking List | Technical data source | Unavailable | No approved data provider is available for this query. The operator must configure and approve the provider; retrying alone does not close this gap. | Source Open SpamCop Blocking List in a new window Appeal / delisting Open SpamCop Blocking List in a new window |
| SpamRATS | Technical data source | Unavailable | No approved data provider is available for this query. The operator must configure and approve the provider; retrying alone does not close this gap. | Source Open SpamRATS in a new window Appeal / delisting Open SpamRATS in a new window |
| Spamhaus ZEN | Technical data source | Unavailable | No approved data provider is available for this query. The operator must configure and approve the provider; retrying alone does not close this gap. | Source Open Spamhaus ZEN in a new window Appeal / delisting Open Spamhaus ZEN in a new window |
188.40.70.237
SPF-autorisierte Sender-IP multi-provider
Incomplete
| Data source | Classification | Result | Check details | Actions |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Abusix Guardian | Technical data source | Unavailable | No approved data provider is available for this query. The operator must configure and approve the provider; retrying alone does not close this gap. | Source Open Abusix Guardian in a new window Appeal / delisting Open Abusix Guardian in a new window |
| Barracuda Reputation Block List | Technical data source | Unavailable | No approved data provider is available for this query. The operator must configure and approve the provider; retrying alone does not close this gap. | Source Open Barracuda Reputation Block List in a new window Appeal / delisting Open Barracuda Reputation Block List in a new window |
| SpamCop Blocking List | Technical data source | Unavailable | No approved data provider is available for this query. The operator must configure and approve the provider; retrying alone does not close this gap. | Source Open SpamCop Blocking List in a new window Appeal / delisting Open SpamCop Blocking List in a new window |
| SpamRATS | Technical data source | Unavailable | No approved data provider is available for this query. The operator must configure and approve the provider; retrying alone does not close this gap. | Source Open SpamRATS in a new window Appeal / delisting Open SpamRATS in a new window |
| Spamhaus ZEN | Technical data source | Unavailable | No approved data provider is available for this query. The operator must configure and approve the provider; retrying alone does not close this gap. | Source Open Spamhaus ZEN in a new window Appeal / delisting Open Spamhaus ZEN in a new window |
46.182.18.10
SPF-autorisierte Sender-IP multi-provider
Incomplete
| Data source | Classification | Result | Check details | Actions |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Abusix Guardian | Technical data source | Unavailable | No approved data provider is available for this query. The operator must configure and approve the provider; retrying alone does not close this gap. | Source Open Abusix Guardian in a new window Appeal / delisting Open Abusix Guardian in a new window |
| Barracuda Reputation Block List | Technical data source | Unavailable | No approved data provider is available for this query. The operator must configure and approve the provider; retrying alone does not close this gap. | Source Open Barracuda Reputation Block List in a new window Appeal / delisting Open Barracuda Reputation Block List in a new window |
| SpamCop Blocking List | Technical data source | Unavailable | No approved data provider is available for this query. The operator must configure and approve the provider; retrying alone does not close this gap. | Source Open SpamCop Blocking List in a new window Appeal / delisting Open SpamCop Blocking List in a new window |
| SpamRATS | Technical data source | Unavailable | No approved data provider is available for this query. The operator must configure and approve the provider; retrying alone does not close this gap. | Source Open SpamRATS in a new window Appeal / delisting Open SpamRATS in a new window |
| Spamhaus ZEN | Technical data source | Unavailable | No approved data provider is available for this query. The operator must configure and approve the provider; retrying alone does not close this gap. | Source Open Spamhaus ZEN in a new window Appeal / delisting Open Spamhaus ZEN in a new window |
46.182.21.2
SPF-autorisierte Sender-IP multi-provider
Incomplete
| Data source | Classification | Result | Check details | Actions |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Abusix Guardian | Technical data source | Unavailable | No approved data provider is available for this query. The operator must configure and approve the provider; retrying alone does not close this gap. | Source Open Abusix Guardian in a new window Appeal / delisting Open Abusix Guardian in a new window |
| Barracuda Reputation Block List | Technical data source | Unavailable | No approved data provider is available for this query. The operator must configure and approve the provider; retrying alone does not close this gap. | Source Open Barracuda Reputation Block List in a new window Appeal / delisting Open Barracuda Reputation Block List in a new window |
| SpamCop Blocking List | Technical data source | Unavailable | No approved data provider is available for this query. The operator must configure and approve the provider; retrying alone does not close this gap. | Source Open SpamCop Blocking List in a new window Appeal / delisting Open SpamCop Blocking List in a new window |
| SpamRATS | Technical data source | Unavailable | No approved data provider is available for this query. The operator must configure and approve the provider; retrying alone does not close this gap. | Source Open SpamRATS in a new window Appeal / delisting Open SpamRATS in a new window |
| Spamhaus ZEN | Technical data source | Unavailable | No approved data provider is available for this query. The operator must configure and approve the provider; retrying alone does not close this gap. | Source Open Spamhaus ZEN in a new window Appeal / delisting Open Spamhaus ZEN in a new window |
88.99.254.36
SPF-autorisierte Sender-IP multi-provider
Incomplete
| Data source | Classification | Result | Check details | Actions |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Abusix Guardian | Technical data source | Unavailable | No approved data provider is available for this query. The operator must configure and approve the provider; retrying alone does not close this gap. | Source Open Abusix Guardian in a new window Appeal / delisting Open Abusix Guardian in a new window |
| Barracuda Reputation Block List | Technical data source | Unavailable | No approved data provider is available for this query. The operator must configure and approve the provider; retrying alone does not close this gap. | Source Open Barracuda Reputation Block List in a new window Appeal / delisting Open Barracuda Reputation Block List in a new window |
| SpamCop Blocking List | Technical data source | Unavailable | No approved data provider is available for this query. The operator must configure and approve the provider; retrying alone does not close this gap. | Source Open SpamCop Blocking List in a new window Appeal / delisting Open SpamCop Blocking List in a new window |
| SpamRATS | Technical data source | Unavailable | No approved data provider is available for this query. The operator must configure and approve the provider; retrying alone does not close this gap. | Source Open SpamRATS in a new window Appeal / delisting Open SpamRATS in a new window |
| Spamhaus ZEN | Technical data source | Unavailable | No approved data provider is available for this query. The operator must configure and approve the provider; retrying alone does not close this gap. | Source Open Spamhaus ZEN in a new window Appeal / delisting Open Spamhaus ZEN in a new window |
Scope limit: The result applies only to the named data sources at the displayed check time. It is not a delivery guarantee or proof for or against spam activity.
Embed badge
Fixed variants without tracking, scripts or external resources.
<a href="https://sendequelle.com/domain-check/firemail.de"><img src="https://sendequelle.com/domain-check/firemail.de/badge.svg?variant=standard&theme=light" alt="Sendequelle domain trust check for firemail.de: AAA, 98 out of 100" width="250" height="52" loading="lazy"></a>
Report an inaccurate or problematic public report
Select the affected findings and explain what seems incorrect. Your explanation is reviewed privately and never displayed in the public report. Submitting a concern does not automatically change the findings or visibility.
The score is an external technical assessment, not a certificate, guarantee, legal review or complete security audit.