Skip to main content

By State / District of Columbia

District of Columbia Trucking Email Security

71.7% of active carrier domains in District of Columbia have no enforced DMARC. That leaves freight operators open to email impersonation, payment-redirect fraud, and cargo theft via phishing.

Edition: 2026-Q2State rank: #51Carriers: 212Domains: 201
By Stefan Efros, CEO & Founder, EFROS
Updated ·

No enforced DMARC

71.7%

national: 80.1%

p=reject

12.0%

national: 7.5%

Microsoft 365

48.2%

national: 38.1%

M365 + no DMARC (carriers)

63

national: 92,822

MTA-STS

4.2%

national: 3.3%

DNSSEC

4.2%

national: 6.1%

Dead domains

10

of 201 scanned

Total carriers

212

10 with dead domain

Risk bands — District of Columbia carriers

Carrier counts by risk band (composite email-security pain score). Critical = score 70+; Minimal = score <15.

Risk bandScore rangeCarriersDomains
Criticalscore 70+1414
Highscore 50–694444
Mediumscore 30–499789
Lowscore 15–294340
Minimalscore <1544

District of Columbia vs. national average

No enforced DMARC71.7%vs 80.1% national
p=reject adoption12.0%vs 7.5% national
MTA-STS4.2%vs 3.3% national
DNSSEC4.2%vs 6.1% national

What the District of Columbia numbers actually mean

DMARC posture. District of Columbia's share of carrier domains with no enforced DMARC sits at 71.7%, better than the national average by 8.4 points. District of Columbia carriers adopt the enforced p=reject DMARC policy at a meaningfully higher rate than the national pool. At the protective end of the distribution, 12.0% of District of Columbia domains are at p=reject, the only DMARC policy that actually instructs receivers to drop spoofed mail.

Microsoft 365 surface. Microsoft 365 mailflow adoption is heavier than the national distribution. Every M365 tenant already includes the controls needed to enforce DMARC, so the 63 M365 carriers in District of Columbia with DMARC disabled are leaving paid-for protection switched off. That share is 29.7% of all District of Columbia carriers — a one-flag-flip remediation set that any regional MSP or in-house IT lead can clear in a single quarter.

Transport encryption. MTA-STS adoption sits at 4.2%, materially below the threshold a freight payment-redirect attacker would have to clear to be inconvenienced by transport-layer policy. DNSSEC adoption in District of Columbia runs at 4.2% (vs 6.1% national), which matters for downstream DKIM and MTA-STS validation but is still a minority signal.

Risk-band shape. District of Columbia's critical-band share is 6.6% versus 8.4% nationally, with the pressure shifting into the high band (20.8% of state carriers) where one or two control gaps still leave room for impersonation. The composite pain score blends SPF posture, DMARC enforcement, MTA-STS presence, and DNSSEC, so a carrier clusters in the critical band only when several controls fail together. Remediation that flips DMARC to enforcement plus turns on MTA-STS typically moves a carrier two bands down in one quarter.

What this means for buyers and shippers. If you are dispatching freight, settling broker payments, or receiving rate confirmations from District of Columbia-based carriers, the operational exposure is the 71.7%of domains that cannot stop a stranger from sending email in the carrier's name. Payment-redirect and load-redirect fraud rides on exactly that gap. Verifying a counterparty's DMARC posture before a first wire (a 30-second DNS lookup) is the cheapest control in the freight stack.

Compare District of Columbia with other states

States closest in carrier-count rank to District of Columbia. Each is scored on the same DNS-derived control set, so the comparison is apples-to-apples.

See where your own domain stands

The research is free and self-serve. Run the same public checks on your own domain in about a minute — SPF, DKIM, DMARC, MTA-STS, DNSSEC, and more — and get a scored report by email. No agents, no credentials.

Data as of 2026-05-20from public DNS measurements. Statistics are domain-weighted unless noted. State scope is the carrier's FMCSA-registered state. Methodology: read the full index.