SPF hard and softfail

Use this forum if you want to suggest a new feature to hMailServer. Before posting, please search the forum to confirm that it has not already been suggested.
Post Reply

Do you need this feature?

Yes
12
100%
No
0
No votes
 
Total votes: 12

andipfaff
New user
New user
Posts: 3
Joined: 2008-07-07 10:16

SPF hard and softfail

Post by andipfaff » 2008-07-07 11:48

hMailserver does not differentiate between SPF hard and softfail. Unfortunately many Mailserver are not correctly and strictly configured (incomplete list of allowed servers) so they answer with a soft fail on a request. It would be great being able to choose whether to accept or deny soft fails.

Thanks in advance
Andi Pfaff

^DooM^
Site Admin
Posts: 13861
Joined: 2005-07-29 16:18
Location: UK

Re: SPF hard and softfail

Post by ^DooM^ » 2008-07-07 17:01

docs wrote:SPF stands for Sender Policy Framework. Domain owners can, by means of a TEXT record in their DNS, identify the email servers that are allowed to send email from their domain. If you enable SPF in hMailServer, hMailServer will check if the sender's IP address matches the IP address in the DNS-TEXT record. If not, the email message will be treated as spam. More information about SPF can be found on http://spf.pobox.com/. hMailServer only treat SPF FAIL-result as spam.
A soft fail is not meant to trigger a block that is the point of a softfail. It would be nice if hMail added a header though that stated softfail for SPF.
If at first you don't succeed, bomb disposal probably isn't for you! ヅ

Keba
Normal user
Normal user
Posts: 126
Joined: 2009-04-11 11:43

Re: SPF hard and softfail

Post by Keba » 2009-07-22 12:28

I've been thinking about this idea lately - I would like to see softfail SPF (or no SPF record which is the same thing in my book) be configurable as a SPAM score.

Having the ability to either accept (negative score) or reject (large positive score) or mark as spam (low positive score) would be great...

Personally I'd mark softfail (or no SPF record) emails with a +1 so that it was marked in the header as such, but probably wouldn't get the email marked as spam (and never rejected as a result of this one scoring option) - this would save me a lot of manual work when trying to analyse which emails.

If the feature was implemented as a scorable system rather than a binary accept/reject option then I'd vote yes.
Keba

User avatar
Slug
Moderator
Moderator
Posts: 1369
Joined: 2005-03-13 05:42
Location: Sydney Australia
Contact:

Re: SPF hard and softfail

Post by Slug » 2009-07-26 16:56

+1 with what Keba posted
Missing Hmailserver ... Now running Debian servers

RmnKt
New user
New user
Posts: 1
Joined: 2018-07-03 20:39

Re: SPF hard and softfail

Post by RmnKt » 2018-07-03 20:43

I'm just testing hMailServer and I am very disappointed by the absence of this feature.

I would vote for separate scores for FAIL, SOFTFAIL, NEUTRAL, ABSENT and +ALL results.

Also option to enforce DMARC/DKIM would be great.

User avatar
mattg
Moderator
Moderator
Posts: 20028
Joined: 2007-06-14 05:12
Location: 'The Outback' Australia

Re: SPF hard and softfail

Post by mattg » 2018-07-03 23:55

FWIW I do this with SpamAssassin

I also re-write all +all spf records on the fly
Just 'cause I link to a page and say little else doesn't mean I am not being nice.
https://www.hmailserver.com/documentation

User avatar
EduardoFoltran
Normal user
Normal user
Posts: 39
Joined: 2016-08-12 15:04

Re: SPF hard and softfail

Post by EduardoFoltran » 2018-07-31 15:46

I believe any implementation that gives more fine tunning on spams is welcome. It may not be excencial and I am sure experienced people will always find a workarround, but having it easily configurable does help and saves a lot of time.

Post Reply