Microsoft O365 labels nanog potential fraud?
ahodgson at lists.simkin.ca
Wed Mar 29 22:03:20 UTC 2017
On Wednesday 29 March 2017 14:28:30 Carl Byington wrote:
> For an example of that (unless I am misunderstanding something), we
> --> Hello marketo-email.box.com [184.108.40.206], pleased to meet you
> <-- MAIL FROM:<$MUNGED at marketo-email.box.com>
> <-- RCPT TO: ...
> dkim pass header.d=mktdns.com
> rfc2822 from header = $MUNGED at email.box.com
> dig _dmarc.email.box.com txt +short
> "v=DMARC1; p=reject; ..."
> dig email.box.com txt +short
> "v=spf1 ip4:220.127.116.11 -all"
> So given the dmarc reject policy, it needs to pass either spf (which
> fails 18.104.22.168 != 22.214.171.124), or dkim (which fails since it
> is not signed by anything related to email.box.com.
> Am I missing something, or is that just broken?
That appears to be broken. The -all on the SPF record alone breaks it, since
receivers should refuse it at that point. But yeah the DMARC is also broken.
Interestingly, the mail I've seen recently from email.box.com has multiple
signatures, one of which is from email.box.com. And it originated from
More information about the NANOG