Summary
A sudden drop in DMARC authentication, often observed through tools like Google Postmaster Tools, signals that a portion of your outgoing email is no longer passing DMARC checks. This can occur for various reasons, including changes in your email sending infrastructure, new or unauthenticated sending sources, or modifications to your DMARC record itself. Understanding the precise cause requires a deep dive into your DMARC reports, which provide granular data on authentication results for all emails sent from your domain.
Key findings
- New sending sources: The most common cause of a DMARC authentication drop is the introduction of new email sending platforms or services that are not properly configured with SPF or DKIM, or that do not align identifiers for DMARC. These unauthenticated emails will fail DMARC checks, leading to a noticeable dip in your overall authentication rate.
- Misconfiguration: Errors in your SPF, DKIM, or DMARC DNS records can inadvertently cause authentication failures. This could include exceeding SPF lookup limits, incorrect DKIM keys, or syntax errors in your DMARC record.
- Policy changes: While less common for sudden drops unless self-imposed, stricter DMARC policies (e.g., moving from p=none to p=quarantine or p=reject) can reveal pre-existing authentication issues that were previously masked.
- Reporting delays: Postmaster Tools data might have a delay, so a drop observed in February could reflect issues that began earlier. Always cross-reference with real-time DMARC reports if possible.
Key considerations
- DMARC reports are vital: Implementing an RUA (reporting URI for aggregate reports) address in your DMARC record allows you to receive XML reports detailing your domain's email authentication performance. These reports are crucial for diagnosing drops and identifying unauthorized sending sources. Learn more about how to interpret DMARC reports.
- Audit sending sources: Conduct a thorough audit of all services, platforms, and third-party vendors (e.g., ESPs, CRM systems, marketing automation tools) authorized to send email on behalf of your domain. Ensure each is properly configured for SPF and DKIM, and that identifier alignment is maintained.
- Gradual policy enforcement: For domains new to DMARC, it's generally advised to start with a p=none policy to gather data before moving to p=quarantine or p=reject. A sudden shift to p=reject without proper visibility can lead to legitimate emails being blocked (blacklisted) or sent to spam.
- Common DMARC errors: Understand common DMARC failure reasons, such as a DMARC policy that is not enabled or an SPF DNS timeout issue. For more technical insights, refer to how to fix DMARC fail errors.
What email marketers say
Email marketers often face the challenge of understanding DMARC authentication drops without direct technical control over infrastructure. Their focus typically revolves around the impact on campaign performance and identifying non-compliant sending behaviors within their organization. They often rely on their IT teams to implement and monitor DMARC, leading to potential communication gaps.
Key opinions
- Need for DMARC reports: Marketers frequently express the need for DMARC aggregate reports (RUA) to gain visibility into their email authentication status, especially when troubleshooting sudden drops.
- Shadow IT concerns: A common suspicion among marketers is that a new, unapproved SaaS provider or mail server might have been introduced by another department without proper authentication setup.
- Challenges with IT collaboration: Marketers often find it challenging to coordinate with IT teams to implement DMARC policies or make necessary DNS changes for RUA addresses.
- Impact of strict policies: Some marketers acknowledge the difficulty and potential negative impact of starting with a p=reject DMARC policy without sufficient monitoring.
Key considerations
- Proactive monitoring: Even without direct IT control, marketers should regularly monitor DMARC authentication rates in Google Postmaster Tools and other available dashboards. This helps identify drops early.
- Internal communication: Establish clear communication channels with IT departments to ensure all new email sending services are properly vetted and configured for DMARC compliance. This can prevent unexpected drops in authentication.
- Understand DMARC's purpose: While complex, understanding the basics of DMARC, SPF, and DKIM, and especially how identifier alignment works, empowers marketers to ask the right questions.
- Focus on deliverability impact: A drop in DMARC authentication can lead to emails going to spam or being blocked, directly impacting campaign performance. Marketers should communicate this impact to justify resources for DMARC implementation and maintenance. For more details, see email authentication requirements.
Marketer view
Email marketer from Email Geeks suggests that marketers need to gain access to their DMARC reports to effectively troubleshoot any authentication drops. Without these reports, it is very difficult to identify the precise reasons behind the observed decrease. The reports provide detailed logs of email authentication results.
Marketer view
Email marketer from Email Geeks believes that implementing an RUA address for DMARC reports can be a very challenging process, especially when dealing with internal IT teams. The friction involved can delay crucial insights into email authentication performance, making it harder to fix issues quickly. They highlight the bureaucratic hurdles involved in getting necessary configurations in place.
What the experts say
Email deliverability experts agree that a consistent drop in DMARC authentication typically points to underlying technical issues, most often related to new, unauthorized, or improperly configured sending sources. They stress the critical role of DMARC reports in diagnostics and advise against aggressive DMARC policies without a comprehensive understanding of email flows.
Key opinions
- Unauthorized SaaS providers: Experts frequently hypothesize that a consistent DMARC drop, especially around a fixed percentage, indicates that a new SaaS provider or internal system is sending emails without proper DMARC alignment.
- DMARC complexity: Many experts acknowledge that DMARC, while powerful, can be a complex and frustrating protocol to implement and manage, especially in large organizations.
- Policy misguidance: There's a strong consensus among experts that advising a blanket p=reject policy for all senders is irresponsible and can lead to significant deliverability issues and lost mail.
- Importance of DMARC reports: Access to DMARC aggregate reports (RUA) is repeatedly emphasized as the most effective way to diagnose and resolve authentication issues, providing detailed insights into sending sources and failure reasons.
Key considerations
- Identify all sending IPs: Thoroughly investigate if any new mail servers, IPs, or sending sources have been added or changed recently. These are prime candidates for DMARC failures if not properly authenticated.
- Verify DMARC alignment: Even if SPF and DKIM pass, DMARC requires identifier alignment. Ensure that the 'From' domain visible to recipients aligns with the domain used for SPF or DKIM authentication. This is a common point of failure, as explained in why DMARC fails when SPF and DKIM pass.
- Implement DMARC gradually: Transitioning your DMARC policy from p=none to p=quarantine or p=reject should be a phased approach, allowing for careful monitoring and adjustment. This prevents legitimate emails from being inadvertently blocked or marked as spam.
- Leverage DMARC tools: Utilize DMARC reporting tools to simplify the analysis of XML reports. These platforms can aggregate and visualize data, making it easier to identify the source of DMARC failures and manage your email ecosystem effectively. For broader insights, see what DMARC policy senders should use.
Expert view
Expert from Email Geeks suggests that a 7% consistent drop in DMARC authentication strongly points to a specific new sending source that is not properly authenticated. They believe that if the percentage remains stable, it's highly likely that a new SaaS provider has been integrated into the company's workflow without adequate DMARC configuration, causing a fixed portion of email to fail. They recommend thoroughly auditing all recent additions to the sending infrastructure.
Expert view
Expert from Email Geeks states that DMARC can be a challenging protocol to manage, often leading to frustration among email professionals. They highlight its inherent complexity, particularly when attempting to achieve full compliance across diverse sending environments. They emphasize that while DMARC is powerful, its implementation often involves unexpected hurdles and extensive troubleshooting.
What the documentation says
Official documentation and industry standards consistently define DMARC's role in verifying email authenticity through SPF and DKIM alignment. Drops in DMARC authentication indicate a deviation from these established protocols, often pointing to issues with domain configuration, sender authorization, or message handling.
Key findings
- DMARC authentication requirement: RFC 7489, which defines DMARC, establishes that email authentication is verified by aligning the "From" header domain with either the SPF-authenticated domain or the DKIM-signed domain. A drop signifies a failure in this alignment process for a portion of sent mail.
- Policy enforcement: DMARC policies (p=none, p=quarantine, p=reject) dictate how recipient mail servers should handle emails that fail authentication. A sudden drop in authentication implies that a policy might be taking effect on previously unmonitored or newly non-compliant traffic.
- Aggregate reports: DMARC documentation emphasizes the utility of aggregate (RUA) reports for gaining visibility into authentication results across the internet. These reports categorize emails by SPF/DKIM pass/fail status and DMARC compliance, offering direct clues to authentication drops.
- Alignment modes: DMARC supports both relaxed and strict alignment modes for SPF and DKIM. A change in alignment mode (or a misunderstanding of current mode) can cause emails to fail DMARC even if SPF and DKIM pass independently.
Key considerations
- Comprehensive DMARC implementation: For full protection and accurate reporting, domains should implement SPF, DKIM, and DMARC together. A drop in DMARC authentication highlights gaps in this combined authentication framework.
- DNS record accuracy: Any alteration to DNS records for SPF, DKIM, or DMARC must be meticulously checked for syntax errors, missing values, or unintended modifications that could lead to authentication failures. Tools like a DMARC record generator can assist.
- Third-party senders: Documentation specifies that third-party sending services must be configured to ensure their emails align with your DMARC policy. Drops often occur when these services are not properly authorized or configured for alignment. Read our simple guide to DMARC, SPF, and DKIM.
- Policy implementation: Official guidelines recommend a cautious rollout of DMARC policies, starting with monitoring and moving to enforcement only after understanding all legitimate sending sources. A rapid shift to enforcement can cause a drop in legitimate emails being authenticated. For more, refer to Email on Acid's DMARC policy guidance.
Technical article
Documentation from RFC 7489 specifies that DMARC builds upon SPF and DKIM by adding a linkage between the sender's apparent domain (in the "From" header) and the domains authenticated by SPF and DKIM. A drop in DMARC authentication means this crucial alignment has failed for a certain volume of messages. It underscores the importance of correctly configuring both underlying protocols to pass DMARC.
Technical article
Documentation from Google Postmaster Tools states that DMARC authentication rates are key indicators of a sender's email authenticity and reputation. A declining percentage suggests that a portion of emails purporting to be from your domain are not passing these critical checks, which can lead to increased spam filtering. Senders are advised to regularly monitor these metrics to maintain good standing.
Related resources
12 resources
Related pages
Why does DMARC authentication fail when SPF and DKIM pass, and how can it be fixed?
How to troubleshoot DMARC failures and their impact on email deliverability?
How to interpret DMARC reports for unrecognized email sending sources and low volume DMARC failures?
How does DMARC impact Gmail deliverability and sender reputation?
How to safely transition your DMARC policy to quarantine or reject
Understanding and troubleshooting DMARC reports from Google and Yahoo
Why Your Emails Are Going to Spam in 2024 and How to Fix It
Ultimate Guide to Google Postmaster Tools V2
A simple guide to DMARC, SPF, and DKIM
Why your emails are getting a 'DMARC verification failed' error
