Hi Ale,
Thanks for your explanation.
I am gathering information to set up DMARC policy for my organisation. I
have
registered to this list with my personal G Suite account.
In my organisation, I have already set up SPF.
Recently, few users received a few spoofing email. Therefore, I thought of
In article
you write:
>Can we enable DMARC just by enabling only SPF?, without DKIM? If it's
>possible what are the issues we will come across without DKIM?
I would encourage you not to do that. As others have said, it sort of
works until there is any sort of forwarding. I can report that
On 20/05/2020 06:31, Roshan Hiripitiyage via dmarc-discuss wrote:
Can we enable DMARC just by enabling only SPF?, without DKIM? If it's
possible what are the issues we will come across without DKIM?
Yes you can.
AIUI, the problem with SPF (other than misconfiguration) is that
forwarding
Hi,
On Wed 20/May/2020 07:31:35 +0200 Roshan Hiripitiyage via dmarc-discuss wrote:
> Can we enable DMARC just by enabling only SPF?, without DKIM? If it's possible
> what are the issues we will come across without DKIM?
While it is possible, SPF only won't cover forwarding. Mail that you send
Can we enable DMARC just by enabling only SPF?, without DKIM? If it's
possible what are the issues we will come across without DKIM?
Thanks
Roshan
___
dmarc-discuss mailing list
dmarc-discuss@dmarc.org
http://www.dmarc.org/mailman/listinfo/dmarc-discuss
Dorai Ashok S A via dmarc-discuss:
In the last few weeks, I have started receiving DMARC reports from
google.com with DKIM success for an unauthorized sender. Does this
mean my signing keys are compromised (or) is there any other
explanation in DMARC for this?
A. Schulze via dmarc-discuss wrote:
maybe host.hoststreem.com[67.205.101.106] is a mail forwarder?
check your logs if you send 4 messages *to* this hosts.
I have searched the logs. No email has been directly sent to that IP or
host. But you are right, It looks like a mail forwarder. I can
