Null MX does nothing to prevent spoofing. It is just to signal to mail senders that your domain does not receive email.
I did ask why the DNS wizard did not include them and was told:
We considered this, but came to the conclusion that not having a MX record at all has the same effect of adding a null MX record so in order to keep it simpler and spare the extra record we decided against including it in the restrictive records wizard section.
Personally, I use Null MX whenever I have domains that don’t need to receive email.
I, too use Null MX on my domains that do not receive email.
I also make vigorous use of the “sends no mail” SPF record. The referenced Cloudflare article is the first time I have seen a null DKIM suggested. Is there any benefit to publishing an empty DKIM? Doesn’t simply not having a matching DKIM record accomplish the same end result?
I was just in the midst of replying to my own question when your reply notfication arrived. I also found that that the benefit of the null DKIM is that it serves to declare any matching selector as invalid. I guess I have a new RR to add to some zones.