On Wed, Jul 14, 2021 at 05:43:57PM +1000, raf wrote:
> Here's a (silly) thing that wrong with DMARC: :-)
> I've sent two messages to this mailing list so far, and
> I've received 52 DMARC forensic/failure report emails
> as a result! :-)
Your mails are not DKIM signed, so of course they will fail.
> But seriously, I'd also appreciate a critique of DMARC.
> It seems like a reasonable attempt to solve some of the
> flaws with SPF and DKIM. If it fails to do that, or it
> has flaws of its own, I'd be interested in hearing
> about it.
DMARC is documented in a informational RFC, so it never got a proper
standard review and you can clearly see it in every corner. On of the
largest problems is the use of SPF.
Bastian
--
Either one of us, by himself, is expendable. Both of us are not.
-- Kirk, "The Devil in the Dark", stardate 3196.1
