
Rspamd 1.2: Fast, free and open-source spam filtering system - cebka
https://rspamd.com/announce/2016/03/21/rspamd-1.2.0.html
======
dochtman
I've started using this a few months ago on my mail server that mostly just
forwards stuff to GMail, and it's been really good. It catches (and rejects)
most of the bad stuff before it even ends up in GMail's filters and, more
importantly, this means my forwarding server doesn't get rate-limited anymore
by GMail for sending so much spam.

I've been packaging rspamd for Gentoo, and it's pretty straightforward to
build and run (more so now if you run Gentoo, of course), so that's good too.

~~~
blakesterz
This is the first time I've seen rspamd, looks interesting, do you find it
better than spamassassin?

~~~
cebka
My opinion is definitely not very objective as I'm the author of this project,
however, I tried to do some recent comparison of rspamd vs SA:
[https://rspamd.com/misc/2016/03/03/rspamd-
performance.html](https://rspamd.com/misc/2016/03/03/rspamd-performance.html)
and there is another 3-rd party opinion here:
[https://github.com/haraka/Haraka/pull/964#issuecomment-10069...](https://github.com/haraka/Haraka/pull/964#issuecomment-100694945).

In brief, rspamd can use the most of SA rules but it provides more
optimization tricks than SA does. However, it is less mature and could be
harder to setup than SA. You can also check my recent FOSDEM talk:
[https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=_fl9i-az_Q0](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=_fl9i-az_Q0)

I'm really sorry that this information is not in the landing page of
rspamd.com - that's obviously my fault.

~~~
jlgaddis
You may already have this posted somewhere, but a feature comparison between
SA and rspamd would be very handy.

~~~
cebka
Well, I've recently ported a massive setup of SA rules and I've tried to add
all functions that are supported by SA to rspamd. The only ones unsupported
are pyzor/razor/dcc (all that is covered by fuzzy check:
[https://rspamd.com/doc/modules/fuzzy_check.html](https://rspamd.com/doc/modules/fuzzy_check.html)).

Both systems support statistics (rspamd uses 5-gramms hidden Markov model and
SA uses naive bayes), they both support different backends for statistics
(redis and sqlite for rspamd), per-user statistics, autolearning. Among
network checks, they support URIBLs, RBLs, DMARC, DKIM, SPF. Obviously, both
systems support regexp rules. However, I'm not an expert in SA features and
might thus miss something...

------
jlgaddis
Anyone using this in a large environment care to comment on how it compares to
SpamAssassin, especially with regard to per-user settings and false
negatives/false positives?

------
kev009
The code is really refreshing, not surprising since the author is a BSD
developer :)

------
brightball
This looks really solid. I know one of the big methods to work around
something like this is to change the destination of included links after
successful delivery.

Does this provide a way to replace links in a message so that they can be
evaluated on click for continuous protection? Optionally of course since this
would be more of a company policy type of protection than anything else.

~~~
cebka
Rspamd itself does not alter message in any way. However, it keeps all urls
with their relative positions during scan. Moreover, it can resolve redirects
for urls (e.g. for t.co or goo.gl) and provide 'real' links. But the second
part of job: links analysis and rewriting is not provided by rspamd.

------
coverband
The level of documentation for this project is super-impressive, especially
since it seems to be mainly a one-man effort. Great job on this, congrats!

(Apologies in advance to other contributors if I was incorrectly discounting
their efforts; I made an assumption based on the number of commits on the
repo.)

