PCI DSS v4.0 and DMARC: Debunking the Misconceptions
Fact Check: PCI DSS v4.0 does not mandate DMARC, SPF, or DKIM as compliance requirements—despite what some vendors are implying.
Lately, there’s been misinformation circulating about an alleged PCI DSS v4.0 “mandate” for DMARC by March 31, 2025. Some vendors are pushing this narrative, likely to promote their email security products. But let’s set the record straight:
What PCI DSS v4.0 Actually Requires (And What It Doesn’t)
PCI DSS Requirement 5.4.1 states:
“Processes and automated mechanisms are in place to detect and protect personnel against phishing attacks.”
This means that organizations must implement phishing protections, but PCI DSS does not dictate a specific technology like DMARC. Instead, the guidance recommends a multi-layered approach to phishing protection, which may include:
Why Are Some Vendors Misleading Organizations?
Some security vendors claim that DMARC compliance is mandatory by March 31, 2025 to sell their solutions. This is misleading marketing.
领英推荐
Reality Check: The March 31, 2025 date refers to when Requirement 5.4.1 moves from “Best Practice” to “Mandatory”, meaning organizations must implement some anti-phishing measures—but it does not require DMARC specifically.
If a vendor tells you PCI DSS requires DMARC, SPF, or DKIM, ask them to cite the actual PCI DSS requirement number—they won’t be able to.
What Should Organizations Do?
Final Thoughts
PCI DSS v4.0 is about security outcomes, not specific vendor solutions. While DMARC is a good practice, organizations have many ways to meet phishing protection requirements.
Don’t let vendors dictate your compliance strategy—understand the facts and implement the controls that best fit your risk profile.
What’s your take on this? Have you seen vendors misleading companies about PCI DSS and DMARC? Drop your thoughts below!
#PCIDSS #Cybersecurity #PhishingProtection #Compliance
ISO 27001:2022 Lead Auditor | Customer Success Lead
5 天前While PCI DSS v4.0 doesn’t explicitly mandate DMARC, it also states that implementing SPF, DKIM, and DMARC is a best practice. This is only until March 31, 2025—after which it becomes a required consideration during assessments.?Email authentication remains a crucial part of a strong cybersecurity strategy. We've seen organizations fall victim to phishing attacks because they overlooked DMARC, SPF, and DKIM. Compliance should never be the only driver for security—proactive protection is key.
Sr. Compliance & Privacy Consultant at Mapp Digital, CIPP/E
1 周It my not be explicitly required, but is there a real reason not to implement it? The purpose of DMARC is to allow you to inform receivers how you would prefer they handle messages purporting to come from your domain that fail authentication checks (SPF/DKIM) and enable them to provide you with feedback on it as well.
Principal Consultant at Online Business Systems
4 周This is a great reminder that there there are often more than one way to address a compliance or security requirement. It is important to remember when meeting a compliance / security objective is the following: 1) is it practical, 2) is it sustainable, and 3) does it meet the objective of the control.
Consulting Manager. The views expressed here are my own and not necessarily reflective of FoxPointe Solutions. Security and Compliance Champion, President of ISSA Phoenix Chapter
1 个月AMEN. Shout this from the rooftops.