What evidence do auditors commonly ask for on 14 Block spoofed emails (Very Good)?

Inbound spoofing test using a message forged from the organisation's own domain, showing it rejected or quarantined; DNS records for SPF, DKIM and DMARC on all sending domains, including parked domains; Email gateway settings rejecting or quarantining inbound mail that fails SPF checks; DMARC aggregate reports and the policy stage (none, quarantine or reject) reached.

What is the most common gap auditors find on 14?

DMARC left at p=none indefinitely, so spoofed mail is only monitored

ASD Strategies to Mitigate Cyber Security Incidents · Preventing Malware Delivery and Execution

`14` Block spoofed emails (Very Good)

Block spoofed emails. Use Sender Policy Framework (SPF) or Sender ID to check incoming emails. Use DKIM and DMARC for outgoing emails.

Source: ASD Strategies to Mitigate Cyber Security Incidents, 14. The statement above is our statement of the clause, read from the published text and cited so you can check it against the official text, not the instrument verbatim. Open ASD Strategies to Mitigate Cyber Security Incidents in the compliance library.

artefacts

held by a system

at each review

moderate

to go live

Endpoint management (MDM / EDR)

where the evidence lives

teal = a system already holds it · olive = produced at each review. To go live: easy when half or more of the artefacts are already held by a system, moderate from a quarter to a half, hard below a quarter.

These are the artefacts auditors commonly ask for on this requirement, our guidance rather than text from the standard. Your assessor decides what is sufficient in your context, and asks for samples across the period when a report covers one.

system holds itEvidence a system already holds

Email gateway settings rejecting or quarantining inbound mail that fails SPF checks · Endpoint management (MDM / EDR)

periodic reviewEvidence produced at each review

DNS records for SPF, DKIM and DMARC on all sending domains, including parked domains · Endpoint management (MDM / EDR)
DMARC aggregate reports and the policy stage (none, quarantine or reject) reached · Endpoint management (MDM / EDR)

governing documentDocuments that govern the control

Inbound spoofing test using a message forged from the organisation's own domain, showing it rejected or quarantined · Policy repository / GRC workspace

First move

Start with the 1 of 4 artefacts that already live in a system (Endpoint management (MDM / EDR)); keep the periodic reviews but log each one as a dated record with a named reviewer.

Common gaps auditors find

DMARC left at p=none indefinitely, so spoofed mail is only monitored
Parked or secondary domains lack SPF and DMARC records and can be spoofed
Inbound SPF failures tagged but still delivered to inboxes

Do this for your whole sheet

Paste the rows you run your controls from and get this mapping for every control at once, with the periodic-review ones flagged and a first move per row. No account for the first run.

Build my evidence sheet

13 Control removable storage media (Very Good) · 15 User education (Limited)