Hacker News Reader

> Although most providers correctly identified the 512-bit key as insecure and rejected our DKIM signature, three major providers — Yahoo Mail, Mailfence, and Tuta — reported a dkim=pass result.

Did google really FAIL because of DKIM signature being insecure or because SPF failed?

View on HN

The DKIM verification failed with the result "dkim=policy (weak key)," as it should according to RFC 8301: "Verifiers MUST NOT consider signatures using RSA keys of less than 1024 bits as valid signatures."

thanks, that's also what I was not understanding from the article

Reply on news.ycombinator.com