IP Address: 207.195.184.101
This page shows DMARC authentication failure data for this IP address. Learn more about this data.
Geolocation Information
- Country:
- US United States
- Coordinates:
- 37.751, -97.822
WHOIS Information
- Network Name:
- CM2-A-BLK-1
- CIDR:
207.195.160.0/19- Owner:
- Open Text Corporation
- Org ID:
OTC-68- Address:
- 275 Frank Tompa Drive, Waterloo, ON N2L 0A1
- Reverse DNS:
-
mtout-aus-ryu-rqr.zixworks.com
Last updated: 2/5/2026
Analysis
This IP generated DMARC authentication failures across 5 messages between April 16, 2024 and June 25, 2024, showing low but persistent activity. Every message observed from this source failed both SPF and DKIM verification. Receiving mail providers applied a quarantine disposition, routing messages to spam or junk folders.
The reverse DNS record resolves to mtout-aus-ryu-rqr.zixworks.com. Whether this represents legitimate mail infrastructure depends on whether the hostname aligns with the domains this address is claiming to send on behalf of.
Geolocation places the host in United States, on infrastructure operated by Open Text Corporation. Abuse-reporting channels in this jurisdiction are generally responsive, and reports to the network operator can result in timely remediation.
The address is registered to Open Text Corporation (CM2-A-BLK-1). Enterprise-registered addresses that appear in DMARC failure data are typically either compromised hosts on the organization's network or outbound mail relays that are not properly authorized in the domain's SPF record.
Across the wider CM2-A-BLK-1 network, 9 distinct IPs have been associated with 19 authentication failures over 36 observed messages, spanning 1 country. The failure pattern suggests a mix of abuse sources on this network.
If your domain appears in the From header of mail from this address, treat it as probable spoofing. Verify that your SPF record does not authorize this host, directly or through nested include mechanisms, and that no DKIM selector you publish has been issued to it. If both checks come back clean, the receiver's quarantine action is doing its job.
Your DMARC policy posture matters more than any IP-level response here. The enforcement action applied to this mail indicates your policy is already providing protection. Maintaining p=reject across all your domains closes the gap for attackers who manage partial alignment. Domains that remain at p=none long-term tend to be impersonated repeatedly, because the cost to the attacker of attempting is effectively zero.
Blocking this individual address has limited durability: an attacker can rotate to another address in the same /24 subnet at effectively zero cost. More durable responses include monitoring aggregate DMARC reports so new sources are visible as they emerge, tightening SPF to remove overly permissive include chains or +all mechanisms, and ensuring DKIM is signing every legitimate outbound stream so alignment failures are unambiguous. The formal abuse contact for Open Text Corporation is listed in ARIN WHOIS records, and timely remediation is achievable through that channel.
Network Topology
External Reputation Lookups
Look up this IP in external threat intelligence and reputation databases (opens in new tab):
Nearby IPs
Other IPs in the 207.195.184.0/24 range observed failing DMARC:
207.195.184.103 (4 failures), 207.195.184.113 (1 failure), 207.195.184.133 (1 failure), 207.195.184.143 (1 failure)