Live data from Hacker News

DMARC has been public since 2012 but most company domains still don't enforce it

ciphercue.com

31–40 of 185 posts

Re: DMARC has been public since 2012 but most company domains still don't enforce it

#31
DMARC is simple in theory but quite tricky in practice (with subdomains, for example). You follow the guide for a service (say Mailgun, for example) and everything looks fine, but CloudFlare shows up issues. You fix those issues and you're conflicting the mail service guide.

Anyways, the new CF AI tool is relatively decent for this purpose, explains the fact that most warnings in CF are harmless, but the lack of standardized guidelines is annoying to say the least.

Re: DMARC has been public since 2012 but most company domains still don't enforce it

#32

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Because if someone spoofs an email coming from your domain DMARC tells the receiver what to do with the spoofed email.

And what is the sane way to handle a spoofed email?

`p=reject`, ESPECIALLY for your personal email. `p=quarantine` is really only useful if you suspect your marketing department has set up some email blaster somewhere.

Re: DMARC has been public since 2012 but most company domains still don't enforce it

#33
I am running email server for my private domain using https://github.com/docker-mailserver/docker-mailserver . One day in 2023 i decided that beside of dkim i maybe should also enable dmarc. Because ... well, why not. What happened was that i started reciving regular reports over email from ms and google containing compressed xml containing no info other that empty report was generated. What should I do with that? At that time i could not find any tool that would be able to extract valuable info from that, so I disabled dmarc. Havent looked back since.

Re: DMARC has been public since 2012 but most company domains still don't enforce it

#34
post #28

Sadly the article doesn't really touch on whether or not DMARC accomplishes anything truly useful. When I enabled DMARC for ingress email on one of my own mail servers, it ultimately ended up regularly blocking a handful emails from customers, yet virtually all the spam coming in had valid SPF / DKIM / DMARC, as do most of the phishing attacks. The core problem is that the real need of email end users need is a way o…

> The core problem is that the real need of email end users need is a way of determining whether or not to trust a given sender.

Which is only the core problem because dmarc fixed the other core problem of figuring out who the given sender is.

DMARC does not solve everything, but it does make other solutions more effective.

Re: DMARC has been public since 2012 but most company domains still don't enforce it

#35

Email has been turned into a by-the-corporation, for-the-corporation service. Corporations need DMARC so they can control email and the ability to spam. The spam I cannot block is spam from Google. If you decide to think about this, you will quickly realize that email is f*ked and needs to be forked. Perhaps we need a Community Email Initiative that blocks corporations and only allows Community members. Trust is the…

You can already do this without changing anything. Just set your corporate mailserver to not accept mail from common community email providers. There's a reason nobody does this, and it's because it's a bad idea.

There is so much crossover between personal email and corporate email.

Re: DMARC has been public since 2012 but most company domains still don't enforce it

#36
post #9

I really think we should be solving a much bigger problem of the major email providers not providing an automated way of handling abuse and not caring about abuse reports at all. Most of my spam comes from the three major email providers and at this point I gave up even trying to send abuse reports because they just get ignored. The big companies do not have to care because nobody will block Google, Microsoft or Amaz…

Email providers do have an automated way of handling abuse. Send the message to abuse@provider and they automatically ignore it. =)

Re: DMARC has been public since 2012 but most company domains still don't enforce it

#37
post #2

I am self-hosting my (secondary) email and have only implemented SPF and DKIM. This works fine on a practical level for me. What would be the benefit of setting up DMARC on top?

DMARC is essentially an opt-in to strict mode. Primarily it prevents other people from forging email to look like it is coming from you. The goal of dmarc is to prevent other people from impersonating you.

Re: DMARC has been public since 2012 but most company domains still don't enforce it

#38
post #4

The article speaks about DMARC monitoring, but not about "writing" it. So many orgs are too small to have someone paying attention of these things. Where I work, the CTO used to manage the DNS, but with very little understanding of what it all means. It was just copy and paste. And yes, it also says p=none. Probably because it was in the example. It's like setting up a website for your company, and picking some wordp…

LLMs are very good at helping you manage DMARC/DNS related configuration, even as a non-expert. I used it to develop custom DMARC report processing app that: 1. sucks in reports sent to our dmarc inbox into a sqlite db, 2. displays the results in a web page. The reports queue up in the mailbox and I open and start the app once a month to check the status. The agent also also reviewed the state of email-related DNS records, describe what needs to change, including how and why, and verify changes after the fact to ensure they are correct.

Some changes I made at the direction of an agent: fix domainkeys CNAMEs for M365, rotate M365 dkim keys that haven't been rotated for over a decade, fix broken spf record formatting.

My biggest issue is that squarespace refuses to enable dkim signing for transactional emails that they send for us (order/shipping confirmation etc). The email sending service they use (socketlabs) supports it but they are not interested in enabling the feature, so I can't lock down our dmarc. I guess that means squarespace is not a good fit for our needs; it's just disappointing that we have to move to a different platform again for technical reasons that are solvable with a dashboard switch.

Re: DMARC has been public since 2012 but most company domains still don't enforce it

#39
post #28

Sadly the article doesn't really touch on whether or not DMARC accomplishes anything truly useful. When I enabled DMARC for ingress email on one of my own mail servers, it ultimately ended up regularly blocking a handful emails from customers, yet virtually all the spam coming in had valid SPF / DKIM / DMARC, as do most of the phishing attacks. The core problem is that the real need of email end users need is a way o…

^ this

Additionally, I would probably guess correctly that almost all spam comes from rotating ASNs these days. Aka from companies that do "growth marketing" or other bullshit that isn't a valid business but just... spamming people.

A lot of the domains that fall through the cracks for single-spam-campaigns have been taken over by botnet campaigns, so the actual owners of said domains probably don't know that their website is spamming everyone else.

But the major providers are the culprit, too, here. Gmail, hotmail, microsoft o365, mailgun ... they all don't even enforce SSL from server to server, and let through "sendmail" like spam because the spammers are paying customers to them.

Source: I am maintaining antispam [1] which I am using to combat spam, phishing, and malware campaigns targeting my customer networks.

[1] https://github.com/cookiengineer/antispam

Post reply on HN