--- title: "Idaho Trucking Email Security — 78.6% lack DMARC | EFROS" description: "Email-security posture of 2,891 active motor carriers in Idaho. 78.6% of domains have no enforced DMARC, 8.5% use p=reject. Free, public, source-cited." canonical: https://efros.com/research/us-trucking-email-security-index/by-state/idaho/ --- - [Home](https://efros.com/) - /[Research](https://efros.com/research/) - /[US Trucking Email Security Index](https://efros.com/research/us-trucking-email-security-index/) - /[By State](https://efros.com/research/us-trucking-email-security-index/by-state/) - /Idaho By State / Idaho # Idaho Trucking Email Security **78.6%** of active carrier domains in Idaho have no enforced DMARC. That leaves freight operators open to email impersonation, payment-redirect fraud, and cargo theft via phishing. Edition: 2026-Q2 State rank: #35 Carriers: 2,891 Domains: 2,347 By [Stefan Efros](https://www.linkedin.com/in/stefanefros-cyberdefense/), CEO & Founder, EFROS Updated · May 19, 2026 No enforced DMARC 78.6% national: 80.1% p=reject 8.5% national: 7.5% Microsoft 365 36.0% national: 38.1% M365 + no DMARC (carriers) 620 national: 92,822 MTA-STS 3.9% national: 3.3% DNSSEC 6.6% national: 6.1% Dead domains 124 of 2,347 scanned Total carriers 2,891 126 with dead domain ## Risk bands — Idaho carriers Carrier counts by risk band (composite email-security pain score). Critical = score 70+; Minimal = score <15. | Risk band | Score range | Carriers | Domains | | --- | --- | --- | --- | | Critical | score 70+ | 255 | 224 | | High | score 50–69 | 841 | 722 | | Medium | score 30–49 | 1,143 | 889 | | Low | score 15–29 | 514 | 377 | | Minimal | score ## Idaho vs. national average No enforced DMARC 78.6% vs 80.1% national p=reject adoption 8.5% vs 7.5% national MTA-STS 3.9% vs 3.3% national DNSSEC 6.6% vs 6.1% national ## What the Idaho numbers actually mean **DMARC posture.** Idaho's share of carrier domains with no enforced DMARC sits at **78.6%**, within 1.5 points of the national average. enforced p=reject DMARC adoption is roughly in line with the national pool: most Idaho domains either have no DMARC at all or are stuck at the monitor-only p=none policy. At the protective end of the distribution, 8.5% of Idaho domains are at p=reject, the only DMARC policy that actually instructs receivers to drop spoofed mail. **Microsoft 365 surface.** Microsoft 365 mailflow adoption sits below the national rate, which shifts the remediation surface toward self-hosted and Google Workspace estates where DMARC has to be configured at the DNS layer rather than flipped on in a tenant policy. That share is **21.4%** of all Idaho 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 3.9%, materially below the threshold a freight payment-redirect attacker would have to clear to be inconvenienced by transport-layer policy. DNSSEC adoption in Idaho runs at **6.6%** (vs 6.1% national), which matters for downstream DKIM and MTA-STS validation but is still a minority signal. **Risk-band shape.** Idaho's critical and high bands combine to 37.9% of state carriers, close to the national distribution, so remediation prioritization here should follow the same shape as the national program. 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 Idaho-based carriers, the operational exposure is the 78.6%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 Idaho with other states States closest in carrier-count rank to Idaho. Each is scored on the same DNS-derived control set, so the comparison is apples-to-apples. [### Maine Rank #3481.0% no DMARC · 2,664 carriers](https://efros.com/research/us-trucking-email-security-index/by-state/maine/) [### New Hampshire Rank #3680.3% no DMARC · 1,970 carriers](https://efros.com/research/us-trucking-email-security-index/by-state/new-hampshire/) [### Alaska Rank #3378.2% no DMARC · 2,305 carriers](https://efros.com/research/us-trucking-email-security-index/by-state/alaska/) [### Louisiana Rank #3772.9% no DMARC · 2,593 carriers](https://efros.com/research/us-trucking-email-security-index/by-state/louisiana/) [### Nebraska Rank #3276.7% no DMARC · 4,402 carriers](https://efros.com/research/us-trucking-email-security-index/by-state/nebraska/) [← Full US Trucking Email Security Index](https://efros.com/research/us-trucking-email-security-index/) [← All states](https://efros.com/research/us-trucking-email-security-index/by-state/) [Switch to cargo-segment view →](https://efros.com/research/us-trucking-email-security-index/by-cargo/) ## 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. [Scan your domain free →](https://efros.com/tools/security-scan/) [Email security for fleets](https://efros.com/industries/trucking-company-msp/) [Talk to EFROS](https://efros.com/contact/?source=trucking-email-research) 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](https://efros.com/research/us-trucking-email-security-index/).