Live data from Hacker News

Spammers are better at SPF, DKIM, and DMARC than everyone else

toad.social

31–40 of 261 posts

Re: Spammers are better at SPF, DKIM, and DMARC than everyone else

#31
post #25

Earlier quoted context omitted.

In most organizations there is no point in a sysadmin to spend the effort in understanding how to set it up correctly as Marketing has got more authority on email. Marketing will simply demand changes to the config that they do not understand and there is nothing you can do to stop it as they will have the CEO on their side.

Marketing decides on DKIM and SPF ?

DMARC is required for BIMI, and marketing wants that logo to show up in the Gmail app next to your mail

Re: Spammers are better at SPF, DKIM, and DMARC than everyone else

#32
post #5

For me, as someone with their own mail server, these technologies mostly serve to inform me that Russian IP addresses are still trying to send email in the name of my domain for some stupid reason. It makes sense that people whose business is sending email know how to set up email correctly. I'm mostly surprised at how many legitimate sysadmins struggle with getting the basics correct. Surely those dozens of DMARC em…

In most organizations there is no point in a sysadmin to spend the effort in understanding how to set it up correctly as Marketing has got more authority on email. Marketing will simply demand changes to the config that they do not understand and there is nothing you can do to stop it as they will have the CEO on their side.

You mean like the time I had a salesperson demanding that we turn off Cloudflare across our entire domain because he'd read some random article somewhere saying we should?

Re: Spammers are better at SPF, DKIM, and DMARC than everyone else

#33
post #15

The point of SPF/DKIM/DMARC is to bind emails to domains, so no more spoofing. It is naive to expect authentication alone can reduce spams.

Finally, a comment that understands the concepts instead of insolently ranting about how useless it is.

Re: Spammers are better at SPF, DKIM, and DMARC than everyone else

#34
SPF/DKIM is really about mail server reputation. So it mostly benefits larger servers like the ones run by Google, Microsoft and Yahoo. Unfortunately, that means that attempts by those larger providers to combat spam using such reputation will naturally hurt smaller providers. So the actual effects of SPF/DKIM are on the whole negative.

The root problem is that we don't actually need to keep track of email server reputation. No one says to themselves "Huh, this is from a Gmail address, it must be legit". We really want to keep track of sender reputation. We need to be able to treat anonymous email differently than email from people we actually know. That implies that we have some work to do on the problem of identity. As it is, there is not even a way for a known email sender to securely introduce an unknown email sender. You know, the way that regular human people normally are able to transfer identities from one to the other.

Re: Spammers are better at SPF, DKIM, and DMARC than everyone else

#35
post #29
post #25

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Marketing decides on DKIM and SPF ?

The problem I personally ran into as a one person IT department was that the VP of marketing had more power over me, as a manager, and that meant more to my supervisor (the CEO) than me fighting to do things as correctly as possible. I was seen as a roadblock or speed bump. So, they may not decide on DKIM and SPF, but if marketing isn’t happy then their negativity could cause push back that forces changes that may te…

As long as you're not breaking the law / hurting people, does the struggle really matter? The best way I've been able to make people listen to me is by just presenting them with options and results.

If you do it this hacky way - we run this risk and this bad thing can happen etc. After a few times they see the consequence of their decisions people start paying attention to you. Do it a few more and now the company will have an "institutional knowledge" that you are usually right, and even if the manager leave, you still end up like the go-to guy on how to ship.

And sometimes the marketing people might end up being correct! I've once actually battled to "do the correct thing" (way back in the day it was a ruby on rails modeling I think) and the product owner was like - just do it this hacky way I don't care ... I did it the hacky way and you know what - it was the right call - we never changed it again and the business knowledge we got from it was actually valuable.

Re: Spammers are better at SPF, DKIM, and DMARC than everyone else

#36

Moved my mail over to Proton and they had a very nice process that made it easy to add the required DNS entries and verify that they were correct. I was dreading this step as I hadn't done it before but turned out to be a breeze thanks to that.

I moved to Fastmail, and they have a nice guide to set up what's needed on DNS:

https://www.fastmail.help/hc/en-us/articles/360060591153-Man...

Re: Spammers are better at SPF, DKIM, and DMARC than everyone else

#38
post #3

I am just having this problem. Actually getting SPF, DKIM and DMARC right and having a domain with a 0 spam score will still land you in the spam directory. It turns out, you need to have a "reputation"? before your email gets accepted into gmail. My head was spinning as to how that reputation will be built if your email just goes straight to spam. But sure, Linkedin emails are definitively not spam and their dark-pa…

I think the domain rep is worth less than IP rep. I had occasional issues sending issues when I self hosted on a VPS. When I moved my domain to Fastmail I haven’t ever had my emails go to spam. Most home and VPS IP ranges have negative rep.

I am sending from SES. Interestingly, I didn't have a problem getting the email delivered to inbox in fastmail despite having an aggressive "protection level".

Re: Spammers are better at SPF, DKIM, and DMARC than everyone else

#39

Naively I thought that one value proposition of SPF, DKIM and DMARC is that reputation shifts from based on IP to be based on domain, once you set these up correctly. So as long as you can maintain a good reputation for your domain and have SPF, DKIM and DMARC correctly set up, then you can host your SMTP server at any IP and your emails will get delivered. I wonder why it doesn't work this way.

IMHO, their main advantage is that third parties can’t send email which appears to originate from my domain.

I configure my domain to use SPF, so now spammers can’t sign it properly.

However, the fact that an email passes SPF verification only ensures that it was authorised by the domain owner. It doesn’t say anything about whether the domain owner is a spammer.

Re: Spammers are better at SPF, DKIM, and DMARC than everyone else

#40
post #5

For me, as someone with their own mail server, these technologies mostly serve to inform me that Russian IP addresses are still trying to send email in the name of my domain for some stupid reason. It makes sense that people whose business is sending email know how to set up email correctly. I'm mostly surprised at how many legitimate sysadmins struggle with getting the basics correct. Surely those dozens of DMARC em…

> that Russian IP addresses are still trying to send email in the name of my domain for some stupid reason

You can set your policy to reject, that will deter the Russians from using your domain.

Post reply on HN