The Importance of Cybersecurity
Accountants handle a great deal of sensitive information. If hackers obtain this information, they can cause significant harm to their clients. In addition, because accountants are often highly trusted by their clients, hackers may attempt to exploit that trust to launch cyberattacks. Therefore, we dedicate significant resources to improving our security.
Social Engineering is the Most Common Cyberattack
Forget about the movies that depict hackers freely connect to any computer that they want; our computer systems are not that easy to break into. Instead, hackers often rely on social engineering, which involves gaining your trust and misleading you into taking the action that benefits them.
Think about the scam calls pretending to be from a bank or the CRA, or the suspicious emails claiming you have won a lottery. Yes, that is social engineering at work.
The following examples demonstrate how a cybercriminal may exploit your trust in your accountant to launch a cyberattack:
What It Appeared to Be
- Your Account sent you an email with a PDF attachment.
- The PDF attachment contained your financial statements and was protected with the password, “123”.
What It Actually Was
- The email was sent by a hacker impersonating your accountant. — Spoofing
- The PDF attachment contained malware designed to infect your computer. — Phishing
- The attachment was password-protected to prevent your antivirus program from scanning its content.
- You owed taxes to the CRA.
- Your accountant sent you a link to make a tax payment.
- Again, the email was from a hacker, even though the sender’s email address was your accountant’s. — Spoofing
- The website did not belong to the CRA. A cybercriminal had set it up to steal your credit card information. — Phishing
Vulnerability of Classical Email Protocol
Both examples above involve spoofing—faking an identity you trust—and phishing—tricking you into taking an action desired by the attacker. Gaining a victim’s trust is usually the first step in a fraud and email is one of the hackers’ favorite tool.
This is because classical email protocols lack built-in mechanisms to prevent spoofing. In fact, classical email protocols allow senders to specify any email address they want as the sender.
In response, Internet standard organizations have developed several protocols and technologies to help prevent spoofing and phishing. Let’s look at how well TaxWise Accounting and its competitors have adopted the following protocols: HTTPS, SPF, DKIM, DMARC and DNSSEC.
Comparison of Cybersecurity Protocol Adoption
TaxWise Accounting
| Company | Domain | HTTPS | SPF | DKIM | DMARC | DNSSEC |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| TaxWise Accounting | taxwise.accountant | Yes | Yes | Yes | Enforced | Yes |
National Accounting Firms
| Company | Domain | HTTPS | SPF | DKIM | DMARC | DNSSEC |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Deloitte | deloitte.com | Yes | Yes | Yes | Enforced | No |
| PwC | pwc.com | Yes | Yes | Yes | Enforced | No |
| Ernst & Yang | ey.com | Yes | Yes | Yes | Enforced | Yes |
| KPMG | kpmg.com | Yes | Yes | Yes | Enforced | No |
Port Moody Accounting Firms
| Company | Domain | HTTPS | SPF | DKIM | DMARC | DNSSEC |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| MNP | mnp.ca | Yes | Yes | Yes | Enforced | No |
| Gregory, Yick & Associates | gregoryyick.ca | Yes | Yes | Yes | Ignored | No |
| Naicker & Associates | naickercpa.ca | Yes | Yes | No | Spam | No |
| DBM CPA | dbmcpa.ca | Yes | Yes | Yes | Spam | No |
| Koda Accounting | kodaaccounting.com | Yes | No | No | No | Yes |
| Maxpro Financials | maxprofinancials.ca | Yes | Yes | Yes | Ignored | No |
Last updated: Sep 29, 2026
How Did We Check These Domains?
HTTPS
HTTPS is now standard for websites. Most web browsers, such as Google Chrome or Microsoft Edge, will display a warning and drop the connection if the website is not secured by HTTPS. Therefore, we simply verified HTTPS by visiting our competitors’ websites.
SPF
SPF is a published TXT record in the sending domain’s DNS server. We used MxToolbox to check the SPF record. You could also look up the TXT record from dnschecker.org or a similar website.
DKIM
DKIM is more technical to verify. Most accounting firms use either Google Workspace or Microsoft 365 as their email platform. If a firm uses Google Workspace, the public DKIM key is typically published at google._domainkey.xxxxxxx.xxx as a TXT record. If a firm uses Microsoft 365, the DKIM public key can be typically found at selector1._domainkey.xxxxxxxx.xxx as a CNAME record.
After identifying where the DKIM records were, MxToolbox could be used to check the DKIM settings.
DMARC
Similar to SPF, DMARC is published as a TXT record in the domain’s DNS. We used dmarcian to check DMARC records because it not only displays the TXT record but also provides a detailed explanation of its parameters.
What Are the Purposes of These Protocols?
HTTPS
Since your are browsing our webpage, you are already using HTTPS, or Hypertext Transfer Protocol Secure. HTTPS and its predecessor, HTTP, define how you access a webpage. They form the foundation of the modern World Wide Web.
The major vulnerability of HTTP is that all communications between your device and the website are transmitted without encryption. You can think of this method of communication as sending a postcard through the mail. Any machine forwarding the message could potentially read read its content, which may include your user ID, password, Social Insurance Number, or bank account balance. You can imagine how devastating the consequence could be if one of the machines along the way is controlled by a hacker. That’s why HTTPS has largely replaced HTTP for modern websites.
HTTPS encrypts the communications between your device and the website. For example, instead of transmitting something like “Password: ABC123” in readable form, the information is encrypted into data that cannot be understood without the appropriate cryptographic keys. Because the encrypted data does not reveal the meaning of the communication, an eavesdropper cannot simply read your password or other sensitive information.
Email Authentication – SPF, DKIM & DMARC
SPF, DKIM and DMARC are all technologies used for email authentication. They help answer an important question: Is this email really from the sender shown in the message? These three technologies use different methods to validate the sender’s identity, and they are most effective when used together.
SPF
SPF, or Sender Policy Framework, publishes a list of authorized IP addresses or email servers that are allowed to send email on behalf of a domain. This list is published in the domain’s DNS.
SPF is relatively easy to implement, but it has limitations. For example, if the hacker uses an email server on the authorized list, the fake message will pass the SPF test.
DKIM
DKIM, or DomainKeys Identified Mail, uses digital signatures to help verify the authenticity and integrity of an email. The sending domain publishes a public key in DNS and uses a corresponding private key to sign all outgoing emails. The recipient’s server then uses the public key to verify the digital signature attached to the email.
DKIM provides strong protection against message tampering and helps verify that an email was authorized by the sending domain. As long as the sender’s private key remains secure, an attacker cannot practically forge a valid DKIM signature for that domain using modern computing technology.
DMARC
DMARC, or Domain-based Message Authentication, Reporting and Conformance, allows a domain owner to specify how receiving email servers should handle message that fail email authentication checks. Without DMARC, receiving email servers are generally freely decide how to handle the SPF and DKIM failures. Because there are still many domains not implementing SPF and DKIM, many servers may choose to deliver these suspicious emails normally, as if nothing had happened.
DMARC publishes a policy in the sender’s DNS and tells the receiving email servers how to handle the messages that failed the authentication requirements. The sending domain can specify three policies:
- Ignore (p=none): The sending domain requests receiving servers to ignore the authentication failures. This policy indicates that the sending domain is not yet ready to fully implement email authentication.
- Spam (p=quarantine): The sending domain asks receiving servers to deliver the unauthenticated messages to a separate folder, usually the spam or junk folder. This creates partial reliefs but there is still a possibility that recipient still reads the message . This indicates the sending domain has partially implemented SPF and DKIM but not confident enough yet.
- Enforce (p=reject): The sending domain asks receiving servers to delete or return the messages that fail SPF or DKIM authentication. Essentially, this means the sending domain wants to treat all unauthenticated emails as fake and prevent them from reaching the recipients. In our opinion, this is the only secured option that protects clients from the spoofed messages.
In addition to specifying how receiving servers should handle authentication failures, DMARC can also request that receiving servers send reports to a designated email address. These reports allow the sending domain to monitor authentication results and identify potential spoofing attempts.
DNSSEC
If you have patiently read the article so far, you probably noticed that we have mentioned DNS many times. DNS is where we publish email authentication policies and cryptographic keys. Indeed, the Domain Name System is a fundamental part of the Internet and plays an important role in many cybersecurity systems.
However, the traditional domain name system has security limitations. Without DNSSEC, DNS responses can potentially be manipulated by an attacker under certain circumstances. For example, a attacker might successfully interferes with DNS resolution and provide a false IP address, redirecting users to a malicious website.
DNSSEC, or Domain Name System Security Extensions, adds digital signatures DNS so that receiving systems can verify that the information came from an authorized source and has not been altered. This helps protect cybersecurity measures that depend on the integrity of DNS information, including SPF, DKIM, and DMARC.
What Else Did We Do to Protect Our Clients?
We only compared security protocols that can be verified externally. But we didn’t stop there. In addition to the protocols discussed above, we also implemented the following technologies and security measures internally:
Virtual Private Network (VPN)
We link all our devices to our internal VPN server and configure them to communicate with the Internet only through the server. Because the VPN server encrypts the communications passing through it, this architecture reduces the risk of someone eavesdropping on our communications. In addition, it hides the public IP addresses of our devices from the external network, making it more difficult for hackers to target them directly.
Secure Real-Time Transport Protocol (SRTP)
Traditional VoIP protocols may transmit voice communications without encryption, making them vulnerable to eavesdropping. We carefully selected a vendor that enhanced the security of our phone calls by using the SRTP protocol.
Similar to the change from HTTP to HTTPS, SRTP encrypts voice communications, making them more resistant to eavesdropping and certain types of man-in-the-middle attacks.
Antivirus Programs, Firewalls and Periodic Backups
We keep active subscription to commercial cybersecurity programs and install it on every computers we own. These security tools include antivirus programs and firewalls, which strengthen our defenses against malware and other cyberattacks.
To reduce the risk of falling victim to ransomware, we periodically back up our client data both on-premises and in the cloud.
Multi-Factor Authentication (MFA)
We require all employees to use multi-factor authentication when logging in to their work accounts. This adds an additional layer of security beyond passwords.
Can You Trust Emails From Your Accountant?
At the end of the day, we need to ask ourselves: Can we trust the emails from an accountant? More specifically, can we trust the emails when the accountant’s email address appears in the sender field?
Slow Adoption of Technology Puts Clients At Risk
Most medium-sized accounting firms have not yet implemented strong email authentication protocols. As a result, it is better not to blindly trust the emails simply because they appear to come from your accountant. As a client, we also urge you use the methods we described above to check your accountant’s email security settings. If they do not meet the appropriate security standards, you should ask your accountant to strengthen their cybersecurity measures. This is ultimately for your own protection.
National accounting firms have generally done better in our evaluation. Ernst & Young performed particularly well among the firms we evaluated. If you use one of these national firms, including MNP, there email authentication measures should provide stronger protection against spoofing. However, you should still remain cautious when an email requests sensitive information, payments, or other unusual actions.
We Are Committed to Cybersecurity
At TaxWise Accounting, we embrace the power of technology — not only technologies that improve your accounting process, but also the technologies that enhance cybersecurity. As more and more businesses move from on-premises bookkeepers to virtual bookkeeping services, an increased amount of communication is conducted through emails and phone calls, it is increasing important to secure our emails and VoIP phone calls.
That’s why we devote significant resources to making our workplace as secure as possible.
If you also believe in the importance of cybersecurity, feel free to contact us to discuss how to we can help with your accounting needs.
Speak to an Accountant

