Skip to main content
DNS Tool
Engineer's DNS Intelligence Report
Generated 9 Feb 2026, 08:24 UTC
Duration 18.8s
Version v26.10.85
Integrity 79c9aaf01cbfb94511613bb87b59bebea1bff38f9e037099d72dfcd53257b1b79b690b15f49c1f49c94c7fdde7b14a7db29c0f9ce5fd33588eabca9c9d239a9c
Subject Domain
red.com

Engineer's DNS Intelligence Report

red.com
9 Feb 2026, 08:24 UTC · 18.8s ·v26.10.85 · SHA-3-512: 79c9✱✱✱✱ Verify
Executive Methodology
Recon Mode Snapshot Re-analyze New Domain
Footprint Amazon Route 53
DNS Security & Trust Posture
Risk Level: PARTIAL
2 protocols configured, 4 not configured Why we go beyond letter grades
1 monitoring
Suggested Scanner Configuration High Confidence
Based on 20 historical scans of this domain
Parameter Current Suggested Severity Rationale
timeout_seconds 5s 8s low Average scan duration is 31.6s, suggesting DNS responses are slow for this domain. Increasing timeout from 5s to 8s prevents premature resolution failures.
RFC 8767
Suggestions require explicit approval before applying. No automatic changes will be made.
Email Spoofing
Partial
Brand Impersonation
Not Setup
DNS Tampering
Enterprise
Certificate Control
Configured
Monitoring
DANE/TLSA records present but DNSSEC not validated — DANE requires DNSSEC for security (RFC 7672 §1.3)
Configured
DKIM (2 selector(s), 2048-bit), CAA (certificate issuance restricted)
Not Configured
DNSSEC (DNS response signing), MTA-STS (email TLS policy), TLS-RPT (TLS delivery reporting), BIMI (brand logo in inboxes)
Registrar (RDAP) LIVE
Safenames Ltd.
Where domain was purchased
Email Service Provider
Forwardemail.Net
Email: Enabled
Web Hosting
AWS / Amazon
Where website is hosted
DNS Hosting
Amazon Route 53 Enterprise
Where DNS records are edited
Email Security Methodology Can this domain be impersonated by email? Partially
Verdict: Partial email authentication configured - some spoofed messages may be delivered.

SPF Record RFC 7208 §4 Verified

Does this domain declare who may send email on its behalf? Yes
Success ~all 8/10 lookups

SPF valid with industry-standard soft fail (~all), 8/10 lookups

v=spf1 mx include:spf.protection.outlook.com include:mail.zendesk.com a:outboundips.netsuite.com include:rp.oracleemaildelivery.com include:eu.rp.oracleemaildelivery.com include:ap.rp.oracleemaildelivery.com include:sendgrid.net ip4:70.183.25.226 ip4:70.183.25.233 ip4:12.215.166.253 ip4:46.61.187.62 ip4:216.194.106.13 ip4:149.20.194.55 ip4:148.62.51.171 ip4:23.21.109.197 ip4:23.21.109.212 ip4:147.160.167.14 ip4:147.160.167.15 ip4:52.49.235.189 ip4:52.49.201.246 ~all
RFC 7208 Conformant — This SPF record conforms to the syntax and semantics defined in RFC 7208 §4.
RFC Failure Mode: Unlike DMARC (where unknown tags are silently ignored per RFC 7489 §6.3), SPF with unrecognized mechanisms produces a PermError per RFC 7208 §4.6 — the record fails loudly rather than silently.
Related CVEs: CVE-2024-7208 (multi-tenant domain spoofing), CVE-2024-7209 (shared SPF exploitation), CVE-2023-51764 (SMTP smuggling bypasses SPF)
~all is the industry standard. Google, Apple, and most providers default to soft fail. CISA (BOD 18-01) and RFC 7489 confirm that DMARC policy — not SPF alone — is the primary enforcement control. Using ~all allows DKIM to be evaluated before a DMARC decision is made. This domain has DMARC p=none (monitoring only). Enforcing quarantine or reject is recommended to gain real protection.
Legacy Record — Safe to Delete This is a Sender ID record (spf2.0/pra) from a Microsoft experiment circa 2006 that was never standardized. RFC 7208 §A explicitly deprecates it. No modern mail receiver processes this record. It is safe to delete.
v=spf2.0/pra a mx include:radicaepost.com include:spf.protection.outlook.com include:mailsenders.netsuite.com include:sent-via.netsuite.com ~all

DMARC Policy RFC 7489 §6.3 Verified

Are spoofed emails rejected or quarantined? Monitoring only
Warning p=none

DMARC in monitoring mode (p=none) - spoofed mail still delivered, no enforcement

v=DMARC1; p=none; rua=mailto:dmarc-68b7843f04d9df0d350c2996@forwardemail.net
Policy p=none provides no protection - spoofed emails reach inboxes
RFC 7489 Present — DMARC record published per RFC 7489 §6.3.
DMARCbis (Pending): draft-ietf-dmarc-dmarcbis will elevate DMARC to Standards Track, obsolete RFC 7489, replace pct= with t= (testing flag), add np= (non-existent subdomain policy), and mandate DNS tree walk for policy discovery instead of the Public Suffix List.
Related CVEs: CVE-2024-49040 (Exchange sender spoofing), CVE-2024-7208 (multi-tenant DMARC bypass)

DKIM Records RFC 6376 §3.6 Verified

Are outbound emails cryptographically signed? Yes — verified
Found 2048-bit

Found DKIM for 2 selector(s) with strong keys (2048-bit)

mail._domainkey 2048-bit
v=DKIM1; p=MIGfMA0GCSqGSIb3DQEBAQUAA4GNADCBiQKBgQC+H3K87il6I9SQhzygQdm6Hxg9LF1KQAGz9duIk9zNYXgOg9spLftS+C6/3VfW3y1sg/6dYC8LLahyRPr0hrN3shc57Ux/hFPk5ojy7yB2kxw8PzaqaI6BA372VEo6H7uFEfenyQAyCzYMxCpPUpgEb/bZFhWjLEdIhzJ85Hk/3QIDAQAB
selector2._domainkey Microsoft 365 2048-bit
v=DKIM1; k=rsa; p=MIGfMA0GCSqGSIb3DQEBAQUAA4GNADCBiQKBgQDC/80iJzUEJ5QcG+eNG3Rs4R+hfERCx5T8L1m70NlNDSmIB1M6cER5aLXjkciDRRPKdSyRsMvkFVR51A7HWB6uQcB/0H4R43sg/HkHp+gY81PFrn2i8g0DBpE6L/dbxr6lroLnju4bqEX5dBk04RGan3DEBOFttTIosbv3X5b5XQIDAQAB;
RFC 6376 Conformant — DKIM keys and signatures conform to RFC 6376 §3.6 (Internet Standard).
Known Vulnerabilities: DKIM l= tag body length vulnerability (attacker appends unsigned content to signed mail), weak key exploitation (keys below 1024-bit are cryptographically breakable per RFC 6376 §3.3.3), DKIM replay attacks (re-sending legitimately signed messages at scale)

MTA-STS RFC 8461 §3 Verified

Can attackers downgrade SMTP to intercept mail? Not prevented
Warning

No MTA-STS record found

MTA-STS policy enforcement is evaluated in Mail Transport Security below.

TLS-RPT RFC 8460 §3 Verified

Will failures in TLS delivery be reported? No reporting
Warning

No TLS-RPT record found

DANE / TLSA Verified Recon Methodology Can mail servers establish identity without a public CA? Yes
RFC 7672 §3 RFC 6698 §2 2/2 MX

DANE configured — TLSA records found for all 2 MX hosts

MX Host Usage Selector Match Certificate Data
mx1.forwardemail.net 3 DANE-EE (Domain-issued certificate) Public key only (SubjectPublicKeyInfo) SHA-256 5e81da1af16df20b13e667ad6d9c2b65b95bfcd95150caffe7116c1707b4dd2c
mx2.forwardemail.net 3 DANE-EE (Domain-issued certificate) Public key only (SubjectPublicKeyInfo) SHA-256 5e81da1af16df20b13e667ad6d9c2b65b95bfcd95150caffe7116c1707b4dd2c
Email Transport Security

Two mechanisms protect email in transit. DANE is the primary standard; MTA-STS is the alternative for domains that cannot deploy DNSSEC:

  • DNSSEC + DANE (RFC 7672) — Cryptographic chain of trust from DNS root to mail server certificate. Eliminates reliance on certificate authorities. No trust-on-first-use weakness. Requires DNSSEC.
  • MTA-STS (RFC 8461) — HTTPS-based policy requiring TLS for mail delivery. Works without DNSSEC but relies on CA trust and is vulnerable on first use (§10). Created for domains where “deploying DNSSEC is undesirable or impractical” (§2).
This domain uses DNSSEC + DANE — the strongest cryptographic transport security. DANE binds TLS certificates to DNSSEC-signed DNS records, creating a verifiable chain of trust from root to mail server (RFC 7672 §1.3). MTA-STS could complement this for senders that don't validate DNSSEC, but DANE alone provides the highest level of protection available.

Industry trend: Microsoft Exchange Online enforces inbound DANE with DNSSEC (GA October 2024), and providers like Proton Mail and Fastmail also support DANE. Google Workspace does not support DANE and relies on MTA-STS. Both mechanisms coexist because DANE is backward-compatible — senders skip the check if the domain isn't DNSSEC-signed (RFC 7672 §1.3).

Brand Security Can this brand be convincingly faked?
Verdict: Certificate issuance is controlled but brand logo (BIMI) is not configured.

BIMI BIMI Spec Verified Warning

Is the brand identity verified and displayed in inboxes? No

No BIMI record found

CAA RFC 8659 §4 Verified Success IODEF

Does this domain restrict who can issue TLS certificates? Yes

CAA configured - only Sectigo, DigiCert, Let's Encrypt, Amazon can issue certificates

Authorized CAs: Sectigo DigiCert Let's Encrypt Amazon
0 issue "sectigo.com"
0 issue "letsencrypt.org"
0 issue "www.digicert.com"
0 issue "amazon.com"
0 iodef "mailto:iodef@red.com"
Since September 2025, all public CAs must verify domain control from multiple geographic locations (Multi-Perspective Issuance Corroboration, CA/B Forum Ballot SC-067). CAA records are now checked from multiple network perspectives before certificate issuance.
Domain Security Methodology Can DNS responses be tampered with in transit?
Verdict: Delegation is verified but DNS responses are unsigned and could be spoofed.

DNSSEC RFC 4033 §2 Verified Unsigned

DNSSEC not configured - DNS responses are unsigned

Alternative Security: Amazon Route 53 provides enterprise-grade DNS with DDoS protection and monitoring.
Amazon Route 53 (enterprise DNS with DDoS protection), CAA records (certificate issuance control)

NS Delegation Verified

4 nameserver(s) configured

Nameservers: ns-1449.awsdns-53.org ns-1827.awsdns-36.co.uk ns-193.awsdns-24.com ns-738.awsdns-28.net
Multi-Resolver Verification Recon: Consensus reached - 4 resolvers (Cloudflare, Google, Quad9, OpenDNS, DNS4EU) agree on DNS records
Traffic & Routing Where does this domain's traffic actually terminate?

AIPv4 Address

18.160.143.124
18.160.143.112
18.160.143.20
18.160.143.52
Where the domain points for web traffic

AAAAIPv6 Address

No AAAA records
IPv6 not configured

MXMail Servers

10 mx2.forwardemail.net.
10 mx1.forwardemail.net.
Priority + mail server for email delivery
Forwardemail.Net

SRVServices

_sip._tls: 100 1 443 sipdir.online.lync.com.
_sipfederationtls._tcp: 100 1 5061 sipfed.online.lync.com.
SIP, XMPP, or other service endpoints
Web: Reachable (4 IPv4, 0 IPv6) Mail: 2 servers Services: 2 endpoints
Subdomain Discovery RFC 6962 Recon LIVE What subdomains and infrastructure are exposed in certificate logs? Unavailable
How did we find these?
Certificate Transparency Logs Unavailable The results below are from DNS probing only and may be significantly incomplete. CT logs typically reveal hundreds or thousands of additional subdomains via certificate issuance history (RFC 6962).
Re-Analyze to Retry CT Lookup

Passive discovery using Certificate Transparency Logs — publicly auditable records of every TLS certificate ever issued. CT log service was slow or unavailable — showing DNS-probed subdomains only

Δ No Propagation Issues: All DNS records are synchronized between resolver and authoritative nameserver.
DNS Intelligence What does DNS look like right now — and what changed over time?
DNS Evidence Diff Side-by-side comparison
Resolver Records (Public DNS cache)
Authoritative Records (Source of truth)
A 4 / 0 records
18.160.143.124
—
18.160.143.112
—
18.160.143.20
—
18.160.143.52
—
AAAA 0 / 0 records
No records
No records
CAA RFC 8659 §4 5 / 0 records
0 issue "letsencrypt.org"
—
0 iodef "mailto:iodef@red.com"
—
0 issue "sectigo.com"
—
0 issue "www.digicert.com"
—
0 issue "amazon.com"
—
DMARC _dmarc.red.com RFC 7489 §6.3 1 / 0 records
v=DMARC1; p=none; rua=mailto:dmarc-68b7843f04d9df0d350c2996@forwardemail.net
—
MTA-STS _mta-sts.red.com RFC 8461 §3 0 / 0 records
No records
No records
MX RFC 5321 2 / 0 records
10 mx2.forwardemail.net.
—
10 mx1.forwardemail.net.
—
NS RFC 1035 4 / 0 records
ns-1827.awsdns-36.co.uk.
—
ns-193.awsdns-24.com.
—
ns-738.awsdns-28.net.
—
ns-1449.awsdns-53.org.
—
SOA RFC 1035 1 / 0 records
ns-1449.awsdns-53.org. awsdns-hostmaster.amazon.com. 1 7200 900 1209600 86400
—
TLS-RPT _smtp._tls.red.com RFC 8460 §3 0 / 0 records
No records
No records
TXT RFC 7208 §4 19 / 0 records
klaviyo-site-verification=SHA5cE
—
v=spf2.0/pra a mx include:radicaepost.com include:spf.protection.outlook.com include:mailsenders.netsuite.com include:sent-via.netsuite.com ~all
—
mdq267gx87p93v5k76fcg7s86xh7j1kg
—
google-site-verification=URKywT9Orj6_nk93ayvDWupzAH39Xci8dOxAsAuJgI0
—
forward-email-site-verification=IFdNp6eOx3
—
1password-site-verification=FL35IRPJAZA45EMAHJE3DM2P34
—
google-site-verification=wWF7PHkVbQ_Rxb2kv8-dUHz8-AwzLEEV33V9cCNr_hM
—
MS=ms90467680
—
fub7Jg8wns9rH4Byn/ymd3bVcq7z9ufxhBkZWZjgJNDTRUiRYT8uM/QAvHZJMbLpHys5LwcZxFkbqWySIFHd9A==
—
facebook-domain-verification=i6l6p5krhuto4im0f98mvx3pbjfhvi
—
google-site-verification=rfoESIAfF6youN2T4_L_jsIdPbKG_k8abtuxZF2Eyv8
—
_m42h676p7k4b3h9fqw5ogb6m3empi48
—
atlassian-domain-verification=fecVuukmD7HYkotOSHJeZj7bwwPi2KkUXN61uckFqkF4es9wozestIp1cmelFdUo
—
traction-guest=0ca160cd-40d1-4986-8f39-6e435152eec5
—
dropbox-domain-verification=9i3l1qna33qy
—
apple-domain-verification=lrease1jj5yhKu1A
—
p=MIGfMA0GCSqGSIb3DQEBAQUAA4GNADCBiQKBgQDDIyp3V1j2XAo4c9eEIaNpO/W31jONArkhj3L7ttWF8BqCFfLfkB/QYWTIUvItbj3ZiVA5ODPW4/w7Rax7EW15uvs1y/oLT+kyKhTx8DGBWXCpaDOUfjOoSzb+Z/CsaBWBU2vd69lG/76O+I1xFW+6eQ24/fpr3k5mSrtVCrn2awIDAQAB
—
google-site-verification=V4yoSBiET77_9lNFGziBaIrPkhAGJdTjnJ70bmaMH28
—
v=spf1 mx include:spf.protection.outlook.com include:mail.zendesk.com a:outboundips.netsuite.com include:rp.oracleemaildelivery.com include:eu.rp.oracleemaildelivery.com include:ap.rp.oracleemaildelivery.com include:sendgrid.net ip4:70.183.25.226 ip4:70.183.25.233 ip4:12.215.166.253 ip4:46.61.187.62 ip4:216.194.106.13 ip4:149.20.194.55 ip4:148.62.51.171 ip4:23.21.109.197 ip4:23.21.109.212 ip4:147.160.167.14 ip4:147.160.167.15 ip4:52.49.235.189 ip4:52.49.201.246 ~all
—
DNS History Timeline BETA
Your key is sent directly to SecurityTrails and is never stored on our servers. Get an API key
DNS History Timeline BETA

When was a record added, removed, or changed — and could that change be the problem?

Analyze Another Domain

Confirm Your Email Configuration

This tool analyzes DNS records, but to verify actual email delivery, send a test email to Red Sift Investigate. Their tool shows exactly how your emails arrive, including SPF/DKIM/DMARC pass/fail results in the headers.

DATA FRESHNESS & METHODOLOGY

All security-critical records (SPF, DMARC, DKIM, DANE/TLSA, DNSSEC, MTA-STS, TLS-RPT, BIMI, CAA) are queried live from authoritative nameservers and cross-referenced against 5 independent public DNS resolvers (Cloudflare, Google, Quad9, OpenDNS, DNS4EU) at the time of each analysis. No security verdict uses cached data.

Registrar data (RDAP) is cached for up to 24 hours because domain ownership and registration details change infrequently. Certificate Transparency logs (subdomain discovery via RFC 6962) are cached for 1 hour because CT entries are append-only historical records. Sections using cached data are marked with a CACHED badge; live queries show LIVE.

Intelligence Sources

This analysis used 4 DNS resolvers (consensus), reverse DNS (PTR), Team Cymru (ASN attribution), IANA RDAP (registrar), crt.sh (CT logs), and SMTP probing (transport). All using open-standard protocols.

Full List
Verify Report Integrity SHA-3-512 Has this report been altered since generation? Verify below

This cryptographic hash seals the analysis data, domain, timestamp, and tool version into a tamper-evident fingerprint. Any modification to the report data will produce a different hash. This is distinct from the posture hash (used for drift detection) — the integrity hash uniquely identifies this specific report instance.

79c9aaf01cbfb94511613bb87b59bebea1bff38f9e037099d72dfcd53257b1b79b690b15f49c1f49c94c7fdde7b14a7db29c0f9ce5fd33588eabca9c9d239a9c
Evaluations reference 12 RFCs. Methods are reproducible using the verification commands provided. Results reflect DNS state at 9 Feb 2026, 08:24 UTC.
Download Raw Intelligence Download Checksum (.sha3)

Download the intelligence dump and verify its integrity, like you would a Kali ISO or any critical artifact. The SHA-3-512 checksum covers every byte of the download — deterministic serialization ensures identical hashes across downloads.

After downloading, verify with any of these commands:

Tip: cd ~/Downloads first (or wherever you saved the files).

OpenSSL + Sidecar (macOS, Linux, WSL) 
cat dns-intelligence-red.com.json.sha3 && echo '---' && openssl dgst -sha3-512 dns-intelligence-red.com.json
Python 3 (cross-platform) 
python3 -c "import hashlib; print(hashlib.sha3_512(open('dns-intelligence-red.com.json','rb').read()).hexdigest())"
sha3sum (coreutils 9+) 
sha3sum -a 512 dns-intelligence-red.com.json
Compare the output against the .sha3 file or the checksum API at /api/analysis/466/checksum. Hash algorithm: SHA-3-512 (Keccak, NIST FIPS 202).

Every finding in this report is backed by DNS queries you can run yourself. These vetted one-liners reproduce the exact checks used to build this report for red.com. Our analysis adds multi-resolver consensus, RFC-based evaluation, and cross-referencing — but the underlying data is always independently verifiable. We are intelligence analysts, not gatekeepers.

DNS Records

Query A records (IPv4) RFC 1035 
dig +noall +answer red.com A
Query AAAA records (IPv6) RFC 1035 
dig +noall +answer red.com AAAA
Query MX records (mail servers) RFC 1035 
dig +noall +answer red.com MX
Query NS records (nameservers) RFC 1035 
dig +noall +answer red.com NS
Query TXT records RFC 1035 
dig +noall +answer red.com TXT

Email Authentication

Check SPF record RFC 7208 
dig +short red.com TXT | grep -i spf
Check DMARC policy RFC 7489 
dig +short _dmarc.red.com TXT
Check DKIM key for selector 'mail' RFC 6376 
dig +short mail._domainkey.red.com TXT
Check DKIM key for selector 'selector2' RFC 6376 
dig +short selector2._domainkey.red.com TXT

Domain Security

Check DNSSEC DNSKEY records RFC 4035 
dig +dnssec +noall +answer red.com DNSKEY
Check DNSSEC DS records RFC 4035 
dig +noall +answer red.com DS
Validate DNSSEC chain (requires DNSSEC-validating resolver) RFC 4035 
dig +dnssec +cd red.com A @1.1.1.1

Transport Security

Check TLSA record for mx2.forwardemail.net RFC 7672 
dig +noall +answer _25._tcp.mx2.forwardemail.net TLSA
Check TLSA record for mx1.forwardemail.net RFC 7672 
dig +noall +answer _25._tcp.mx1.forwardemail.net TLSA
Verify TLS certificate on primary MX (mx2.forwardemail.net) RFC 6698 
openssl s_client -starttls smtp -connect mx2.forwardemail.net:25 -servername mx2.forwardemail.net 2>/dev/null | openssl x509 -noout -subject -dates
Check MTA-STS DNS record RFC 8461 
dig +short _mta-sts.red.com TXT
Fetch MTA-STS policy file RFC 8461 
curl -sL https://mta-sts.red.com/.well-known/mta-sts.txt
Check TLS-RPT record RFC 8460 
dig +short _smtp._tls.red.com TXT

Brand & Trust

Check BIMI record BIMI Draft 
dig +short default._bimi.red.com TXT
Check CAA records (certificate authority authorization) RFC 8659 
dig +noall +answer red.com CAA

DNS Records

Check HTTPS/SVCB records RFC 9460 
dig +noall +answer red.com HTTPS

Domain Security

Check CDS/CDNSKEY automation records RFC 7344 
dig +noall +answer red.com CDS

Infrastructure Intelligence

RDAP domain registration lookup RFC 9083 
curl -sL 'https://rdap.org/domain/red.com' | python3 -m json.tool | head -50

Transport Security

Test STARTTLS on primary MX (mx2.forwardemail.net) RFC 3207 
openssl s_client -starttls smtp -connect mx2.forwardemail.net:25 -servername mx2.forwardemail.net </dev/null 2>/dev/null | head -5

Infrastructure Intelligence

Search Certificate Transparency logs RFC 6962 
curl -s 'https://crt.sh/?q=%25.red.com&output=json' | python3 -c "import json,sys; [print(e['name_value']) for e in json.load(sys.stdin)]" | sort -u | head -20
Check security.txt RFC 9116 
curl -sL https://red.com/.well-known/security.txt | head -20

AI Surface

Check for llms.txt 
curl -sI https://red.com/llms.txt | head -5
Check robots.txt for AI crawler rules 
curl -s https://red.com/robots.txt | grep -i -E 'GPTBot|ChatGPT|Claude|Anthropic|Google-Extended|CCBot|PerplexityBot'

Infrastructure Intelligence

ASN lookup for 18.160.143.124 (Team Cymru) 
dig +short 124.143.160.18.origin.asn.cymru.com TXT
ASN lookup for 18.160.143.112 (Team Cymru) 
dig +short 112.143.160.18.origin.asn.cymru.com TXT
Commands use dig, openssl, and curl — standard tools available on macOS, Linux, and WSL. Results may vary slightly due to DNS propagation timing and resolver caching.
Intelligence Confidence Audit Engine Verified · 9/9 Evaluated
How confident are these results? Each protocol is independently verified against RFC standards. No self-awarded badges.
SPF
Verified 4853 runs
DKIM
Verified 4672 runs
DMARC
Verified 4837 runs
DANE/TLSA
Verified 4656 runs
DNSSEC
Verified 4834 runs
BIMI
Verified 4671 runs
MTA-STS
Verified 4674 runs
TLS-RPT
Verified 4676 runs
CAA
Verified 4668 runs
Maturity: Development → Verified → Consistent → Gold → Gold Master

Appendix: Verification Commands

The core DNS queries behind this report can be independently verified using these standard terminal commands (dig, openssl, curl). DNS Tool adds multi-resolver consensus, RFC-based evaluation, and cross-referencing on top of the raw data shown here.

DNS Records

Query A records (IPv4) (RFC 1035) 
dig +noall +answer red.com A
Query AAAA records (IPv6) (RFC 1035) 
dig +noall +answer red.com AAAA
Query MX records (mail servers) (RFC 1035) 
dig +noall +answer red.com MX
Query NS records (nameservers) (RFC 1035) 
dig +noall +answer red.com NS
Query TXT records (RFC 1035) 
dig +noall +answer red.com TXT

Email Authentication

Check SPF record (RFC 7208) 
dig +short red.com TXT | grep -i spf
Check DMARC policy (RFC 7489) 
dig +short _dmarc.red.com TXT
Check DKIM key for selector 'mail' (RFC 6376) 
dig +short mail._domainkey.red.com TXT
Check DKIM key for selector 'selector2' (RFC 6376) 
dig +short selector2._domainkey.red.com TXT

Domain Security

Check DNSSEC DNSKEY records (RFC 4035) 
dig +dnssec +noall +answer red.com DNSKEY
Check DNSSEC DS records (RFC 4035) 
dig +noall +answer red.com DS
Validate DNSSEC chain (requires DNSSEC-validating resolver) (RFC 4035) 
dig +dnssec +cd red.com A @1.1.1.1

Transport Security

Check TLSA record for mx2.forwardemail.net (RFC 7672) 
dig +noall +answer _25._tcp.mx2.forwardemail.net TLSA
Check TLSA record for mx1.forwardemail.net (RFC 7672) 
dig +noall +answer _25._tcp.mx1.forwardemail.net TLSA
Verify TLS certificate on primary MX (mx2.forwardemail.net) (RFC 6698) 
openssl s_client -starttls smtp -connect mx2.forwardemail.net:25 -servername mx2.forwardemail.net 2>/dev/null | openssl x509 -noout -subject -dates
Check MTA-STS DNS record (RFC 8461) 
dig +short _mta-sts.red.com TXT
Fetch MTA-STS policy file (RFC 8461) 
curl -sL https://mta-sts.red.com/.well-known/mta-sts.txt
Check TLS-RPT record (RFC 8460) 
dig +short _smtp._tls.red.com TXT

Brand & Trust

Check BIMI record (BIMI Draft) 
dig +short default._bimi.red.com TXT
Check CAA records (certificate authority authorization) (RFC 8659) 
dig +noall +answer red.com CAA

DNS Records

Check HTTPS/SVCB records (RFC 9460) 
dig +noall +answer red.com HTTPS

Domain Security

Check CDS/CDNSKEY automation records (RFC 7344) 
dig +noall +answer red.com CDS

Infrastructure Intelligence

RDAP domain registration lookup (RFC 9083) 
curl -sL 'https://rdap.org/domain/red.com' | python3 -m json.tool | head -50

Transport Security

Test STARTTLS on primary MX (mx2.forwardemail.net) (RFC 3207) 
openssl s_client -starttls smtp -connect mx2.forwardemail.net:25 -servername mx2.forwardemail.net </dev/null 2>/dev/null | head -5

Infrastructure Intelligence

Search Certificate Transparency logs (RFC 6962) 
curl -s 'https://crt.sh/?q=%25.red.com&output=json' | python3 -c "import json,sys; [print(e['name_value']) for e in json.load(sys.stdin)]" | sort -u | head -20
Check security.txt (RFC 9116) 
curl -sL https://red.com/.well-known/security.txt | head -20

AI Surface

Check for llms.txt 
curl -sI https://red.com/llms.txt | head -5
Check robots.txt for AI crawler rules 
curl -s https://red.com/robots.txt | grep -i -E 'GPTBot|ChatGPT|Claude|Anthropic|Google-Extended|CCBot|PerplexityBot'

Infrastructure Intelligence

ASN lookup for 18.160.143.124 (Team Cymru) 
dig +short 124.143.160.18.origin.asn.cymru.com TXT
ASN lookup for 18.160.143.112 (Team Cymru) 
dig +short 112.143.160.18.origin.asn.cymru.com TXT
Running Multi-Source Intelligence Audit

red.com

0s
DNS records — Cloudflare, Google, Quad9, OpenDNS, DNS4EU
Email auth — SPF, DMARC, DKIM selectors
DNSSEC chain of trust & DANE/TLSA
Certificate Transparency & subdomain discovery
SMTP transport & STARTTLS verification
MTA-STS, TLS-RPT, BIMI, CAA
Registrar & infrastructure analysis
Intelligence Classification & Interpretation

Every result includes terminal commands you can run to independently verify the underlying data. No proprietary magic.