Whilst recently implementing DKIM and SPF for both my personal domain e-mail and for the corporate mail-servers I am responsible for, I found a great verification e-mail box from the DKIM mailing list.
If, after setting up your new extensions to the SMTP protocol, you wish to verify everything is working correctly then I thoroughly recommend a blank e-mail to this address: check-auth@verifier.port25.com
Let’s run through the results of this e-mail for my domain, cjbuckley.net:
Summary of Results SPF check: pass DomainKeys check: neutral DKIM check: pass Sender-ID check: pass
Immediately, we can see that the implementations have been successful - this is a good sign!
SPF check details Result: pass ID(s) verified: smtp.mail=example@cjbuckley.net DNS record(s): cjbuckley.net. 300 IN TXT "v=spf1 redirect=_spf.cjbuckley.net" _spf.cjbuckley.net. 300 IN TXT "v=spf1 ip4:87.127.106.176/29 ip4:84.45.189.64/29 include:ukfsn.org -all"
The detail outputted from this SPF check is impressive; as we can see, my domain initially does a redirect to _spf.cjbuckley.net (note the underscore - these _are_ valid in TXT records). This allows many domains I am the hostmaster for (corporate ones, usually) to be easily managed.
For example, I use redirect: _spf.mycorporatedomain.com for all my corporate domains, this cleans up the SPF records and allows easy management of the record database - all other domains can be redirected to _spf.mycorporatedomain.com. It works very well, and is something I noticed Google taking advantage of, initially.. :-)
Next up - DomainKeys:
DomainKeys check details: Result: neutral (message not signed) ID(s) verified: header.From=example@cjbuckley.net DNS record(s):
The checker confirms that I do not have DK implemented - indeed, this is correct. DKIM replaces DK, and is now being driven forward to replace Yahoo! DomainKey’s. Note: gmail.com only verifies DK signatures, not DKIM yet - a bit disappointing, though they _do_ sign both with DKIM and DK.
DKIM check details: Result: pass ID(s) verified: header.From=example@cjbuckley.net DNS record(s): beta._domainkey.cjbuckley.net. 300 IN TXT "k=rsa; t=y;p=MIGfMA0GCSqGSIb3DQEBAQUAA4GNADCBiQKBgQDiIfv9vqSRUo9L8 ztX/C4gfCD/Ivt8eAGyQbjJ2g4Rq764NPwauj5/sY2AfMrFPqhA0ieXWtmJy2gFS c4ZlxT8KYaFsJATOpJfYAXUtzmmQ8+RcioyeN3LjzNhm1gUYyJI1Lw0yD2y+k dN3YxY4NZ0esMXrKbsngTl3pNcNCNxXwIDAQAB"
We can see that our DKIM policy has been verified successfully. As dkim.org states:
DKIM lets an organization take responsibility for a message. The organization taking responsibility is a handler of the message, either as its originator or as an intermediary. Their reputation is the basis for evaluating whether to trust the message for delivery.
Given this statement, e-commerce, financial and banking organisations should have either implemented or be on their way to planning an implementation of DKIM. Personally, I find SPF flawed - DKIM is the wiser choice.
I’m hoping to blog a dkimproxy implementation guide shortly, as the published guide has a few advisories I have issue with and would like clarified.
Comments, welcome!
July 10, 2007



















Sorry, no comments yet.