Mails sent by this forum do not contain SPF and go to spams

[Anonymous]

Hi,

Not an issue with the software, but with the forum itself. I received an email to inform me that I received a reply to a thread created, and it went into spams with a big header “New Eden Mail could not verify that it actually came from hub.displaycal.net. Avoid clicking links, downloading attachments or replying with personal information.”

After checking the email headers, there was no SPF flag, a big factor in having your emails not go into the spam folder.

See this https://support.google.com/a/answer/33786?hl=en

Email headers I received:

Delivered-To: Email
Received: by 2002:a2e:42cf:0:0:0:0:0 with SMTP id h76csp4821404ljf;
Mon, 21 Oct 2019 10:29:57 -0700 (PDT)
X-Google-Smtp-Source: APXvYqxfcOhdPhenf9ML3W+ug3sM60+ZR2+EIfaworyWWB4ElHIxQcJVObmtrZetnLB2im8ntnUo
X-Received: by 2002:a7b:c4cf:: with SMTP id g15mr18887542wmk.122.1571678997429;
Mon, 21 Oct 2019 10:29:57 -0700 (PDT)
ARC-Seal: i=1; a=rsa-sha256; t=1571678997; cv=none;
d=google.com; s=arc-20160816;
b=0AoknlHBwSYW1KIw+i0MZrxvV7O6u6khZOxrCU9qhAgx8IYk8/I+Q4+/jf4mcxFbVe
W6dmXmPF8orGkw5orl5oQRzPAtltK4kmmZZxahICCoKDvNAxZp5YBxmSCu5rxe/q9/ml
jzq7lhOP+VqGNUEobIp33aPwQUFzIfly2Kv6KowSmqBK/fA2cLswGXRcqhhGH2UM19BI
myQWnh8e+RpUGTU86eFcwEwjBWM7df+jpy1WEhUfo26c5WwMFWmelFok8B2vkxYs3O0w
YE6vxXFbEA3FjuIb+BWETVZ73Y2RtjUbrlCriCTailSst+UIlGOXqXLHtGimEWG6G4+8
6NOQ==
ARC-Message-Signature: i=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=google.com; s=arc-20160816;
h=content-transfer-encoding:mime-version:message-id:from:date:subject
:to:precedence;
bh=swociOe+JxzFN9ZEc1Pcm/MePJLkfX0aFQgB4Vu93QI=;
b=T9r0T7XXu7Gpj4wE1442o3MaxBUQlLtqFQXZqn+uCTLBBwyqJvtYSTmTx7Z2V6IUkS
DoN2woybCW3fEvqCnwiXKwIHfMn1EluMMB82Qi/XQWFElk+ZG/cZwVAtD6oNeP1Z0ND7
dMIUoJflxc1HDlC7h7PqWgkX2uzR+T8zV1MivM2gx9XyBuCZaikTbGIBnCPHHtkZadT/
uqL2b8ewXT0Va2Zm7gkTJ+ghonCOQxQb7UVFvhhkVe4e9Unt0K047HutfS6toFLMhcvs
VPv2uCxV/F+apJE3XKLw2n/2xAfkZfkk8N6eYsgCdfY7c9ii3/tZZ90SWpCaApqN6Hsm
Ukvg==
ARC-Authentication-Results: i=1; mx.google.com;
spf=neutral (google.com: 212.227.126.130 is neither permitted nor denied by best guess record for domain of Email) smtp.mailfrom=Email
Return-Path: <Email>
Received: from mout.kundenserver.de (mout.kundenserver.de. [212.227.126.130])
by mx.google.com with ESMTPS id d15si12689481wrv.28.2019.10.21.10.29.57
for <Email>
(version=TLS1_2 cipher=ECDHE-RSA-AES128-GCM-SHA256 bits=128/128);
Mon, 21 Oct 2019 10:29:57 -0700 (PDT)
Received-SPF: neutral (google.com: 212.227.126.130 is neither permitted nor denied by best guess record for domain of Email) client-ip=212.227.126.130;
Authentication-Results: mx.google.com;
spf=neutral (google.com: 212.227.126.130 is neither permitted nor denied by best guess record for domain of Email) smtp.mailfrom=Email
Received: from infong93.kundenserver.de ([82.165.82.140]) by mrelayeu.kundenserver.de (mreue009 [172.19.35.7]) with ESMTPA (Nemesis) id 1MuluN-1i54UB3gbz-00rszl; Mon, 21 Oct 2019 19:29:56 +0200
Received: from 77.181.181.43 (IP may be forged by CGI script)
by infong93.kundenserver.de with HTTP
id zRjrT8-1hpTfo3AV6-00fp3f; Mon, 21 Oct 2019 19:29:56 +0200
X-Sender-Info: <Email>
Precedence: bulk
To: Email
Subject: [DisplayCAL] Obtaining a gamma of 2.15 instead of 2.2
Date: Mon, 21 Oct 2019 17:29:56 +0000
From: DisplayCAL <Email>

[Florian Höch]

SPF records determine which domain(s) or IP addresses can send mail via the host’s mailserver domain. Ensuring that email can be received is the client’s responsibility, not the host’s, though – after email has been sent, it is obviously outside the host’s control. Client filtering based on presence of specific headers is completely optional and up to the client. Presence of an SPF header alone cannot be used as a reliable spam/not-spam indicator for that reason. Even if a message contains an SPF header, it may still be considered spam by a client when dealing with automated messages. For this reason, I would strongly suggest the habit of adding any domain(s) you are expecting to receive mail from to an exclusion (white) list, and occasionally checking the “Spam” folder for false positives.

• This reply was modified 4 years, 6 months ago by Florian Höch. Reason: Typo

[Anonymous]

I researched a lot everything related to SPF, DKIM, DMARC and all related.

You are entirely right, SPF does not guarantee not being put in spams. However it helps.

It’s one of those things being pushed to be standardized everywhere, just like HTTPS.

If you can implement it, it won’t have a visible impact, but might make things easier for people getting displaycal emails in spams.

I know you don’t have infinite time to spend on the project, implementing SPF should be at the lowest priority on a to-do list, but it would be better to have it.

Thanks for your time for replying 🙂

[Florian Höch]

I’ve added SPF and DMARC records to DNS.

[Anonymous]

The email sent from your reply to this thread got a PASS for both SPF and DMARC.

Perfect! Thanks 🙂

[Author]

Posts