Red Sift’s definitive guide to email security
What are the global mandates and guidance for DMARC in 2026?
For cybersecurity, email security and IT teams, understanding and adhering to global DMARC (Domain-based Message Authentication, Reporting, and Conformance) requirements is imperative.
At Red Sift, we have put together a tabulated overview of DMARC mandates and guidance enforced across different regions worldwide. Our aim is to provide a clear, unambiguous guide that consolidates the varying global requirements into one accessible format.
Whether you are an IT security professional, email administrator, or a compliance officer, this table will serve as an essential tool to ensure your organization’s email security aligns with international best practices and requirements.
Global DMARC mandates and guidance
Affected Geo | Name | Description | Mandate type | Learn more |
Global | New requirements for bulk senders | Those sending over 5,000 emails a day must authenticate email-sending domains with TLS, DKIM, SPF, DKIM, or SPF alignment and have a DMARC policy of p=none. | Private sector mandate | |
Global | PCI DDS v4.0 Req 5.4.1 | “Automated mechanisms” must be deployed to detect and protect against phishing attacks. Though this requirement is for “processes and mechanisms” and does not point to a specific solution, best practices would point to implementing DMARC, SPF, and DKIM. | Compliance mandate | |
Canada | Email Management Services Configuration Requirements | Ensure that the sender or recipient of government email can be verified using inbound mail using the Sender Policy Framework; Domain Keys Identified Mail (DKIM); and Domain-based Message Authentication, Reporting and Conformance (DMARC). | Mandate for government agencies | |
Denmark | Minimum technical requirements for government authorities 2023 | All governmental agencies are required to implement a DMARC policy of p=reject on all domains. | Mandate for government agencies | |
New Zealand | 2022 New Zealand Information Security Manual, v3.6, section 15.2 | The future replacement for SEEMail will use DMARC and therefore vendors and agencies will need to be compliant. 1. Change of DMARC control compliance from SHOULD to MUST [CID:6019] [CID:6021] 2. Change of DMARC policy setting from p=”none” to p=”reject” [CID:6020] 3. Change of DKIM control compliance from SHOULD to MUST [CID:1797] [CID:1798] | Mandate for government agencies | |
Ireland | Public Sector Cyber Security Baseline Standards, section 2.9 | Public service bodies must implement TLS, SPF, DKIM, and enforce DMARC on all inbound mail. | Mandate for government agencies | |
Netherlands | “Comply or Explain” standards | Mandatory guidelines for government agencies require DKIM, SPF, and DMARC as well as STARTTLS and DANE. | Mandate for government agencies | |
Saudi Arabia | Guide to Essential Cybersecurity Controls (ECC) Implementation, section 2-4-3 | National organizations must implement all necessary measuresto analyze and filter email messages (specifically phishing emails and spam) using advanced and up-to-date email protection techniques. Recommended approachesinclude DKIM, SPF, and DMARC. | Mandate for government agencies | |
UK | Government Cybersecurity Policy Handbook Principle: B3 Data Security | Government departments shall have DMARC, DKIM, and SPF records in place for their domains. This shall be accompanied by the use of MTA-STS and TLS Reporting. This requirement originated from the 2018 Minimum Cybersecurity Standard. | Mandate for government agencies | |
UK | Securing government email | All emails that public sector organizations run on the internet must encrypt and authenticate email by supporting TLS and DMARC at minimum. | Mandate for government agencies | |
UK | Updating our security guidelines for digital services | Any service that runs on service.gov.uk must have a published DMARC policy. | Mandate for government agencies | |
United States | Binding Operational Directive 18-01: Enhance Email and Web Security | Requires all federal agencies to bolster web security with STARTTLS, SPF, DKIM, and DMARC with a policy of p=reject. | Mandate for government agencies | |
Australia | Cybersecurity guidelines: Guidelines for Email | Recommends implementing SPF, DKIM, and DMARC with a policy of p=reject | Guidance | |
Australia | How to combat fake emails | Suggests using SPF, DKIM, and DMARC to prevent domains from being used as the source of fake emails. | Guidance | |
Australia | Malicious email mitigation strategies | Recommends the most effective methods of protecting organizations from email-borne attacks, and includes deploying DKIM, SPF, and DMARC with a “p=reject” policy. | Guidance | |
Canada | Implementation guidance: email domain protection (ITSP.40.065 v1.1) | For complete protection against spoofing, organizations should implement SPF, DKIM, and DMARC. | Guidance | |
EU | Email communication security standards | Recommends using STARTTLS, SPF, DKIM, DMARC, and DANE to protect email communications. | Guidance | |
Germany | Measures to defend against spam and phishing, Section 3.1 | Proposed measures to internet service providers that can be used to reduce the malware and spam problem SPF, DKIM and DMARC. | Guidance | |
Saudi Arabia | Phishing Campaigns for Emotet Malware | Implement Domain-Based Message Authentication, Reporting & Conformance (DMARC) to detect email spoofing using Domain Name System (DNS) records and digital signatures. | Guidance | |
Scotland | A Cyber Resilience Strategy for Scotland: Public Sector Action Plan 2017-2018, v2 | Public bodies should take advantage of DMARC anti-spoofing. | Guidance | |
UK | Email security and anti-spoofing v2 | Make it difficult for fake emails to be sent from your organization’s domains using SPF, DKIM, and DMARC with a policy of at least p=none, including parked domains. Protect your email in transit with TLS. | Guidance | |
UK | Phishing attacks: defending your organisation v1.1 | DMARC, SPF, and DKIM are Layer 1 defenses for stopping spoofed emails used to attack an organization. | Guidance | |
United States | CIS Critical Security Controls v8.0, IG2-9.5 | Implement DMARC policy and verification, starting with Sender Policy Framework (SPF) and the DomainKeys Identified Mail (DKIM) standards. | Guidance | |
United States | CISA INSIGHTS Enhance Email &Web Security | Enable DKIM, SPF, and DMARC with a policy of p=reject. | Guidance | |
United States | Multi-State Information Sharing and Analysis Center (MS-ISAC) Ransomware Guide | To lower the chance of spoofed or modified emails from valid domains, implement DMARC policy and verification. | Guidance | |
United States | NIST 800-53 Security Controls Catalog Revision 5: SI-08 | Employ spam protection mechanisms at system entry and exit points to detect and act on unsolicited messages. DMARC, SPF, and DKIM are one way to address this. | Guidance | |
United States | NIST Special Publication 800-177Revision 1: Trustworthy email | Recommends implementing SPF, DKIM, and DMARC, among other controls to enhance trust in email. | Guidance |
Where to go from here?
The landscape of email security and authentication is constantly evolving.
At Red Sift, we understand the complexities involved in implementing and managing DMARC. Our award-winning Red Sift OnDMARC is designed to simplify the path to DMARC enforcement, offering you best-in-class technology and expertise.
