IETF Logo Mail Archive

Re: [dmarc-ietf] What bad stuff can a broken DMARC record cause?

Damian Lukowski <rfc@arcsin.de> Mon, 25 April 2022 05:54 UTC

Return-Path: <rfc@arcsin.de>
X-Original-To: dmarc@ietfa.amsl.com
Delivered-To: dmarc@ietfa.amsl.com
Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id DBE6E3A21C4 for <dmarc@ietfa.amsl.com>; Sun, 24 Apr 2022 22:54:41 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -2.108
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-2.108 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, DKIM_SIGNED=0.1, DKIM_VALID=-0.1, DKIM_VALID_AU=-0.1, DKIM_VALID_EF=-0.1, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_BLOCKED=0.001, SPF_HELO_NONE=0.001, SPF_PASS=-0.001, T_SCC_BODY_TEXT_LINE=-0.01, URIBL_BLOCKED=0.001] autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no
Authentication-Results: ietfa.amsl.com (amavisd-new); dkim=pass (1024-bit key) header.d=arcsin.de
Received: from mail.ietf.org ([4.31.198.44]) by localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id t8k6tr1D8OPx for <dmarc@ietfa.amsl.com>; Sun, 24 Apr 2022 22:54:36 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from sigil.arcsin.de (sigil.arcsin.de [46.38.233.110]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 4EEA73A21C3 for <dmarc@ietf.org>; Sun, 24 Apr 2022 22:54:34 -0700 (PDT)
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/simple; d=arcsin.de; h= content-transfer-encoding:content-type:content-type:in-reply-to :from:from:references:content-language:subject:subject :mime-version:date:date:message-id:x-amavis-category; s=dkim01; t=1650866070; x=1652680471; bh=I1OI0JauBAWKzsv7EV/Zir0C21TBRXaK og7Dh1dC4Cc=; b=IOoPqydutvrA8K32VuNHX4qYn5K9ktAeVWjJbDFIdYZLdW1W 6sd7sbczq5TDa+u4CNSlJTAvFQDwzQZFDB4VyxZ0dX+k5iaNpgyIYXm9Yy0UvAeZ EIRnyqGu8u5k7VApd4oHvKhnpzJO0TP+TvUSeNaol9QuxyKAEhqlwArXtfs=
X-Amavis-Category: sigil.arcsin.de; category=Clean
Message-ID: <e3f0a0a5-d210-e5da-857d-b8ef12f01ba1@arcsin.de>
Date: Mon, 25 Apr 2022 07:54:29 +0200
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Language: en-US
To: dmarc@ietf.org
References: <20220425001824.500B73E77047@ary.qy>
From: Damian Lukowski <rfc@arcsin.de>
In-Reply-To: <20220425001824.500B73E77047@ary.qy>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8"; format="flowed"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Archived-At: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/dmarc/gI6UNnvkdi-zfrb93tMUfnFSzKs>
Subject: Re: [dmarc-ietf] What bad stuff can a broken DMARC record cause?
X-BeenThere: dmarc@ietf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.29
Precedence: list
List-Id: "Domain-based Message Authentication, Reporting, and Compliance \(DMARC\)" <dmarc.ietf.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/options/dmarc>, <mailto:dmarc-request@ietf.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/browse/dmarc/>
List-Post: <mailto:dmarc@ietf.org>
List-Help: <mailto:dmarc-request@ietf.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/dmarc>, <mailto:dmarc-request@ietf.org?subject=subscribe>
X-List-Received-Date: Mon, 25 Apr 2022 05:54:42 -0000

> Good thought but I was more wondering about the sort of mistakes an
> inept sysadmin would make in configuring DMARC records.

How would that even be possible without the DMARC spec or DMARC implementation being broken? What is a broken DMARC record?

v2.23.0 | Report a Bug | By Email