Hacker News new | ask | show | jobs
by franga2000 144 days ago
How is it not? For all but some old and insecure or fairly exotic setups, DKIM/DMARC validates the sender server is authorised for that domain and the server's account-based outbound filtering validates it was sent by the owner of that mailbox.

If the sending server doesn't do DKIM, it's fundamentally broken, move your email somewhere else. If the sending server lets any user send with an arbitrary local part, that's either intended and desired, or also fundamentally broken. If there are other senders registered on the domain with valid DKIM and you can't trust them, you have bigger problems.
1 comments
Hizonner 144 days ago
> If the sending server doesn't do DKIM, it's fundamentally broken,

No, it just won't get very good deliverability, because everything it talks to is now fundamentally broken.

DKIM shouldn't exist. It was a bad idea from day one.

It adds very little real anti-spam value over SPF, but the worse part is exactly the model you describe. DKIM was a largely undiscussed, back-door change to the attributability and repudiability of email, and at the same time the two-tiered model it created is far, far less effective or usable than just end-to-end signing messages at the MUA.

link
franga2000 144 days ago
DKIM isn't an antispam measure, it's an anti-impersonation measure. With DKIM, you can't impersonate a domain, which means you can trust that any email you get from an email provider was sent in accordance with that provider's security policy. In most cases, that policy is "one user owns one localpart and they can only send from it if they have their password". In cases where it's not, this is intentional and known by their users.

If you as a user can't trust your email server, you've already lost, no matter if something is authorized by an outbound email or a click on an inbound link. If your mail server is evil or hacked, it can steal your OTP token or activation link just as easily as it can send an email in your name.

Yes, end to end authentication is definitely better, but this isn't what people are discussing here. With enforced DKIM, "send me an email" has a nearly identical security profile to "I've emailed you a link, click on it". Both are inferior to end-to-end crypto.

link