Skip to main content

email - SPF and DKIM help: Do the FAIL reports from DMARC indicate an issue?

I am having trouble determining if my SPF and DKIM are configured properly. Here are key details:





  • My domain is mysteryscience.com

  • We send mail from google apps, from SendGrid, and from Intercom. All seem to be working properly, although I do hear cases of our emails getting flagged as spam which is why I'm investigating this.

  • I have enabled SPF, DKIM, and DMARC

  • My SPF record seems to be semantically correct (checked here: http://www.kitterman.com/spf/validate.html)

  • My SPF TXT record is: v=spf1 ip4:198.21.0.234 include:_spf.google.com include:spf.mail.intercom.io -all

  • 198.21.0.234 is my dedicated IP address for sending through SendGrid (mail.mysteryscience.com is my CNAME forwarding to them)



I have enabled DMARC and I'm reviewing the emails I get from various mail servers. While reviewing my results from Google.com I noticed a bunch of SPF and DKIM fails. It looks like these may have been rejections of legitimate emails I sent, but I'm not sure how to read this file. Here are a few of the results, note the "fail" on a few of the < dkim > and < spf > lines. And here is a dmarcian processed version of the XML file: https://dmarcian.com/dmarc-xml/details/Ybk591jex3JpVBmW/






  207.46.163.143
  1
  
    none
    pass
    fail
  



  mysteryscience.com


  
    mysteryscience.com
    pass
  
  
    granderie.ca

    pass
  




  209.85.212.178
  1
  
    none

    fail
    pass
  


  mysteryscience.com


  
    mysteryscience.com

    pass
  




  2607:f8b0:4001:c05::232
  1
  
    none

    pass
    fail
  


  mysteryscience.com


  
    mysteryscience.com

    pass
  
  
    mail.mysteryscience.com
    fail
  





  198.236.20.44
  1
  
    none
    pass
    fail
  


  mysteryscience.com



  
    mysteryscience.com
    pass
  
  
    mail.mysteryscience.com
    fail
  





  209.85.212.175
  1
  
    none
    fail
    pass

  


  mysteryscience.com


  
    mysteryscience.com
    pass
  





  209.85.215.44
  1
  
    none
    fail
    fail

  


  mysteryscience.com


  
    nurturingwisdom.com
    fail
  





  2607:f8b0:4003:c06::236
  2
  
    none
    pass
    fail

  


  mysteryscience.com


  
    mysteryscience.com
    pass
  

  
    ssanpete.org
    none





Can anyone help me determine if these SPF and DKIM fails are problematic?

Comments

Post a Comment

Popular posts from this blog

linux - iDRAC6 Virtual Media native library cannot be loaded

When attempting to mount Virtual Media on a iDRAC6 IP KVM session I get the following error: I'm using Ubuntu 9.04 and: $ javaws -version Java(TM) Web Start 1.6.0_16 $ uname -a Linux aud22419-linux 2.6.28-15-generic #51-Ubuntu SMP Mon Aug 31 13:39:06 UTC 2009 x86_64 GNU/Linux $ firefox -version Mozilla Firefox 3.0.14, Copyright (c) 1998 - 2009 mozilla.org On Windows + IE it (unsurprisingly) works. I've just gotten off the phone with the Dell tech support and I was told it is known to work on Linux + Firefox, albeit Ubuntu is not supported (by Dell, that is). Has anyone out there managed to mount virtual media in the same scenario?
Post a Comment
Read more

hp proliant - Smart Array P822 with HBA Mode?

We get an HP DL360 G8 with an Smart Array P822 controller. On that controller will come a HP StorageWorks D2700 . Does anybody know, that it is possible to run the Smart Array P822 in HBA mode? I found only information about the P410i, who can run HBA. If this is not supported, what you think about the LSI 9207-8e controller? Will this fit good in that setup? The Hardware we get is used but all original from HP. The StorageWorks has 25 x 900 GB SAS 10K disks. Because the disks are not new I would like to use only 22 for raid6, and the rest for spare (I need to see if the disk count is optimal or not for zfs). It would be nice if I'm not stick to SAS in future. As OS I would like to install debian stretch with zfs 0.71 as file system and software raid. I have see that hp has an page for debian to. I would like to use hba mode because it is recommend, that zfs know at most as possible about the disk, and I'm independent from the raid controller. For us zfs have many benefits,
Post a Comment
Read more

apache 2.2 - Server Potentially Compromised -- c99madshell

So, low and behold, a legacy site we've been hosting for a client had a version of FCKEditor that allowed someone to upload the dreaded c99madshell exploit onto our web host. I'm not a big security buff -- frankly I'm just a dev currently responsible for S/A duties due to a loss of personnel. Accordingly, I'd love any help you server-faulters could provide in assessing the damage from the exploit. To give you a bit of information: The file was uploaded into a directory within the webroot, "/_img/fck_uploads/File/". The Apache user and group are restricted such that they can't log in and don't have permissions outside of the directory from which we serve sites. All the files had 770 permissions (user rwx, group rwx, other none) -- something I wanted to fix but was told to hold off on as it wasn't "high priority" (hopefully this changes that). So it seems the hackers could've easily executed the script. Now I wasn't able
Post a Comment
Read more