Looking into first SPF record analysis
Daniel Nashed 11 May 2021 17:01:55
Before adding SPF record checking to SpamGeek, I wanted to find out how much SPF record checking will help me.
And also what would be the best strategy to configure it.
It wasn't a surprise that most e-mail I want passes the SPF check.
But there is also SPAM or at least unwanted e-mail, that might have proper SPF configuration.
Spammers mostly have no SPF configuration. And they are mostly not misusing systems that have proper SPF configurations.
This makes kind of sense, because probably most servers will give very negative ratings for failing SPF checks.
So without SPF records being used in many environments, there would be more misuse of domains.
Now that many environments use it, this made it more safe for others as well.
But for my environment added SPF checks, will not reduce SPAM dramatically.
Adding SPF checks makes still sense and it is even more important to have a poper SPF configuration on your own.
It's not something nice to have. It's a must have today for your domains.
And your domain just needs proper SPF TXT records in DNS.
-- Daniel
| SpamGeek database 2021 -- Good and possible SPAM Category only -- % of the total sum of data presented in each sub category | |||||||
| 48,4% | 1. Very Good | ||||||
| 0,0% | -- No SPF Status -- | ||||||
| 0,2% | 0 - invalid | ||||||
| 0,1% | 1 - neutral | ||||||
| 44,0% | 2 - pass --> Most of the really good mail has a proper SPF record | ||||||
| 0,0% | 3 - fail | ||||||
| 2,0% | 4 - softfail | ||||||
| 1,8% | 5 - none | ||||||
| 0,0% | 6 - temperror | ||||||
| 0,1% | 7 - permerror --> Some people I know, got t heir SPF configuration wrong -- I already sent mails ;-) | ||||||
| 7,6% | 2. Good | ||||||
| 0,0% | -- No SPF Status -- | ||||||
| 0,0% | 0 - invalid | ||||||
| 0,1% | 1 - neutral | ||||||
| 6,8% | 2 - pass --> Most of the good mail has a proper SPF record | ||||||
| 0,0% | 3 - fail | ||||||
| 0,1% | 4 - softfail | ||||||
| 0,4% | 5 - none | ||||||
| 0,0% | 6 - temperror | ||||||
| 0,0% | 7 - permerror | ||||||
| 11,1% | 3. Possible Spam | ||||||
| 0,5% | -- No SPF Status -- | ||||||
| 0,0% | 0 - invalid | ||||||
| 4,1% | 1 - neutral | ||||||
| 3,1% | 2 - pass --> Some possible SPAM has proper SPF records! Many don't see themselves as SPAMers .. | ||||||
| 0,2% | 3 - fail | ||||||
| 0,6% | 4 - softfail | ||||||
| 2,4% | 5 - none | ||||||
| 0,1% | 6 - temperror | ||||||
| 32,9% | 4. Spam | ||||||
| 0,7% | -- No SPF Status -- | ||||||
| 0,8% | 0 - invalid | ||||||
| 3,3% | 1 - neutral | ||||||
| 7,2% | 2 - pass | ||||||
| 0,2% | 3 - fail | ||||||
| 0,5% | 4 - softfail | ||||||
| 20,3% | 5 - none --> Real SPAM has mostly no SPF record | ||||||
| 0,0% | 6 - temperror | ||||||
| 0,0% | 7 - permerror | ||||||
- Comments [0]
![[HCL Domino]](../lotus-domino.gif){kind=small}
![[Domino on Linux]](../domino-linux.gif){kind=small}
![[Nash!Com]](../nashcom.gif){kind=small}
![[Daniel Nashed]](../daniel-nsh.gif){kind=small}