Sinkhole Effectiveness Calculator

Turn sinkhole logs into clear operational effectiveness metrics. Balance redirection, remediation speed, and data quality. Make smarter takedown decisions with comparable scores today, quickly.

Inputs
Enter observed metrics for a time window (day, week, or month).
Tip: Use consistent windows to compare trends.
All malicious DNS/proxy connection attempts detected.
Requests that reached your controlled sinkhole.
Blocked by DNS firewall, proxy, EDR, or IPS.
Domains from intel feeds, investigations, and detections.
Domains routed to your sinkhole infrastructure.
Useful when measuring total control, not just sinkhole reach.
Unique devices/users initiating malicious attempts.
Endpoints you can identify from sinkhole logs.
Benign traffic mistakenly routed to the sinkhole.
Percent of events with required fields (time, domain, resolver, source).
Percent of events mapped to endpoint, user, or asset owner.
Average time from discovery to effective sinkholing.
Average time to alert analysts or ticket remediation.
Average time to clean, isolate, or reimage endpoints.
Controls how the base score is weighted.
Custom weights must total 100.
Scoring note
Final score = weighted base score minus a false-positive penalty. This keeps the score comparable across time windows.
Custom weight inputs
Penalty = FP rate × this value.
Example: FP rate 6% and penalty 0.10 → 0.6 points deducted.
After submit, results appear above this form section.
Formula used
This calculator blends coverage, capture, visibility, and speed into one comparable score. Use the same time window to track improvement.
Component Definition Why it matters
Redirection rate (R) R = redirected / total × 100 Shows how much malicious traffic reaches your sinkhole for observation and control.
Containment rate (redirected + blocked) / total × 100 Tracks overall control of malicious traffic, including non-sinkhole blocks.
Domain coverage (C) C = sinkholed_domains / known_domains × 100 Measures how much of your known domain set is routed to the sinkhole.
Endpoint capture (E) E = captured_endpoints / observed_endpoints × 100 Indicates whether you can identify which assets are affected.
Visibility (V) V = (log_completeness + attribution_success) / 2 Ensures sinkhole data is usable for investigations and reporting.
Speed (P) P = 0.4·MTTS + 0.2·MTTN + 0.4·MTTR (scaled) Rewards faster rerouting, notification, and endpoint remediation.
False-positive penalty Penalty = FP_rate × penalty_weight Prevents “high score” systems that redirect too much benign traffic.
Final score Score = (wR·R + wE·E + wC·C + wV·V + wP·P) − Penalty One number for trending, benchmarking, and prioritization.
Scaling caps: MTTS 48h, MTTN 240m, MTTR 168h. Scores clamp at 0–100 for comparability.
How to use this calculator
  1. Choose a time window (daily, weekly, or monthly) and keep it consistent.
  2. Enter traffic counts from DNS, proxy, firewall, and sinkhole logs.
  3. Fill domain counts from your threat intel and investigations.
  4. Enter endpoint totals from detections, EDR, and identity mapping.
  5. Add quality and timing metrics from SOC processes and tickets.
  6. Select a weight profile or set custom weights that total 100.
  7. Press Calculate, review recommendations, then export CSV/PDF.

Operational definition of sinkhole effectiveness

Sinkhole effectiveness is measured as controlled visibility over malicious destinations, not just blocked queries. This calculator converts telemetry into a 0–100 score so teams can trend performance over time. The score blends redirection, domain coverage, endpoint capture, log quality, and response speed, then subtracts a false‑positive penalty. Use one reporting window and consistent counting rules to keep comparisons defensible. for stakeholders and auditors.

Traffic control and redirection performance

Redirection rate shows what portion of malicious attempts reaches your controlled sinkhole. For example, 120,000 total attempts with 82,000 redirected yields 68.3% redirection. If 21,000 additional attempts are blocked upstream, containment becomes 85.8%, revealing stronger control than sinkhole reach alone. Track bypass causes such as roaming clients, split DNS, encrypted resolvers, or direct‑IP connections, and verify sinkhole responses avoid business disruption.

Domain coverage and onboarding cadence

Coverage compares sinkholed domains to the known malicious domain set. With 340 known domains and 220 sinkholed, coverage is 64.7%, leaving 120 domains un-routed and unobserved. High performers match onboarding cadence to threat‑intel churn, confirm DNS ownership or resolver policy, and monitor TTL behavior. A practical target is 75–90% coverage for active campaigns, with exceptions documented for legal or stability constraints.

Endpoint capture and investigation value

Endpoint capture rate indicates how often sinkhole events can be mapped to a responsible asset. In the example, 410 captured endpoints out of 640 observed gives 64.1%. Raising this rate usually requires richer context: DHCP and IPAM lookups, NAT and proxy mappings, device identifiers from EDR, and identity signals from directory logs. Better attribution reduces “unknown source” cases and improves remediation reporting.

Speed, noise, and continuous improvement

Speed is modeled from mean time to redirect, notify, and remediate, with caps of 48 hours, 240 minutes, and 168 hours to normalize extremes. Faster MTTS and MTTR typically correlate with fewer reinfections and lower analyst workload. Noise is tracked through the false‑positive rate; 120 false positives against 82,000 redirected is 0.15%, usually acceptable, while rates above 5% deserve staged rollouts and tighter allowlists. Review metrics weekly and adjust weights to match priorities.

FAQs
1. What does the calculator measure?

It estimates operational effectiveness of a sinkhole program by combining redirection, containment, domain coverage, endpoint capture, visibility, and response speed into a comparable 0–100 score.

2. How should I count total malicious attempts?

Use the same log sources each period. Count DNS queries or proxy requests classified as malicious, including those later blocked or sinkholed. Avoid mixing multiple detection rules unless you normalize them first.

3. Why can a higher redirection rate reduce the score?

If redirection increases due to misclassification, false positives rise and the penalty subtracts points. The goal is controlled, accurate redirection with low noise, not maximum rerouting.

4. When should I include blocked traffic in redirection?

Enable it when you want a broader “control of traffic” view that rewards upstream blocking. Leave it off when you specifically want to measure sinkhole reach and collection quality.

5. How do I tune the scoring model for my environment?

Use the weight profile or custom weights to match priorities. If your organization has different time expectations, adjust the MTTS, MTTN, and MTTR scaling caps in the code comments.

6. Does the export include sensitive indicators?

The exports summarize counts, percentages, and scores. If you add domain lists or endpoint identifiers later, redact them before sharing outside security operations or external auditors.

Example data table
Sample month-over-month metrics for benchmarking.
Month Total attempts Redirected Blocked Known domains Sinkholed domains Observed endpoints Captured endpoints False positives Effectiveness (example)
2025-1198,40061,20018,60028017052030016066.8%
2025-12112,90074,50020,90031019559036514071.4%
2026-01120,00082,00021,00034022064041012076.2%
Use this table format for reporting and trend reviews. Replace values with your observed metrics.

Related Calculators

Phishing Domain Risk CalculatorMalicious Domain Detection CalculatorDDoS DNS Exposure CalculatorDNSSEC Validation Status CalculatorExpired Domain Risk CalculatorDomain Abuse Risk CalculatorDNS Tunnel Detection CalculatorDNS Query Anomaly CalculatorDomain Trust Score CalculatorDNS Filtering Effectiveness Calculator

Important Note: All the Calculators listed in this site are for educational purpose only and we do not guarentee the accuracy of results. Please do consult with other sources as well.