Conversation

Notices

1. Embed this notice
   l (link2xt@fosstodon.org)'s status on Tuesday, 06-Feb-2024 10:49:42 JST l

   #DMARC #email #DKIM

   • Embed this notice
     Haelwenn /элвэн/ :triskell: (lanodan@queer.hacktivis.me)'s status on Tuesday, 06-Feb-2024 10:50:34 JST Haelwenn /элвэн/ :triskell:

     in reply to
     @link2xt Reminds me that I should just throw away the report thing because 100% of the time it's the *other* provider that has a complete garbage setup.
   • Embed this notice
     vv221 (vv221@fediverse.dotslashplay.it)'s status on Wednesday, 07-Feb-2024 06:58:17 JST vv221

     in reply to
     Oh, I did not know rua is an optional field. Then I guess I will update my setup from:
     v=DMARC1;p=reject;rua=mailto:postmaster\@example.com
     to:
     v=DMARC1;p=reject
     
     Haelwenn /элвэн/ :triskell: likes this.
   • Embed this notice
     l (link2xt@fosstodon.org)'s status on Wednesday, 07-Feb-2024 06:58:18 JST l

     in reply to

     • vv221

     @vv221 You can also unsubscribe from them. My preferred setup currently is "v=DMARC1;p=reject;adkim=s;aspf=s", the strictest policy possible with no reports. Yet it is still not as strict as I want, because I want DKIM enforced and don't care about SPF. Relying on SPF for authentication is like using Telnet with IP address based authentication instead of SSH, this should have been deprecated long ago.

   • Embed this notice
     vv221 (vv221@fediverse.dotslashplay.it)'s status on Wednesday, 07-Feb-2024 06:58:19 JST vv221

     in reply to
     I never read even a single one of DMARC reports I got. Ever.