Issues that prevent me from using OpenEFA

[MauriceW67]

Hi,

I still have two issues with the latest release (1.5.7.10) that prevent me from starting to use OpenEFA:

1. Sending local messages that bypass Spacy arrive in the mailbox with no message body.
2. Mail that is classified as spam by Spacy and subsequently released and marked as safe through the web GUI does not arrive in the mailbox.

Can anyone confirm that they are also experiencing these issues or are they local to my setup?

And to the devs: What's happening with OpenEFA? Things seem to be pretty quiet at the moment.

[Carl Brunning]

i was told tonight could be a update

as the release spam bug is fixed and lots of other bugs
the next release is looking good and am sure everyone going to be happy.
anyway am pushing for the new release so finger cross

[MauriceW67]

Any news yet on a new release?

[Woger]

Scott hasn't been online for a week. I hope everything is allright.

[Carl Brunning]

sorry he been very very busy
but he did get back to me say there been a lot of testing and bug fixes . some of it took a bit longer then expected

did say he working on the new release over the next few days
plus the speed improvment is real good
so like all of us am looking forward to the next release so i can start breaking it lol

[contraspec]

hi,

im also not feeling the good vibes yet to switch, i was under the understanding that openefa was an update of the existing efa5.
too much spam being let in, no greylisting, no dkim, dmarc, spf.

hopefully the original features can be implimented and improved on.

[adrastosefa]

Hang tight a couple more days. Hopefully tomorrow night Pacific time. We have drastically improved the detection, security features, and intelligence of the system. So much so, that grey listing is not even necessary. The domain entropy module covers the majority of that and covers the age of the domain, the randomness of the sender domain, and other features that grey listing was used for.

[adrastosefa]

hi,

im also not feeling the good vibes yet to switch, i was under the understanding that openefa was an update of the existing efa5.
too much spam being let in, no greylisting, no dkim, dmarc, spf.

hopefully the original features can be implimented and improved on.

Originally, the intent was to continue with the version provided at the efa-project.org. However, as we started integrating changes, and working to improve it, we realized that a lot of the libraries and had not been touch or improved upon for years and putting up a dynamic, realtime fight, was extremely difficult. While Sean Iverson is a hero for what he built and maintained (would love to have him as a consultant), I think his posts also support our findings when it came to improving what we have all used for years.

The new version incorporates the good parts of the EFA5, the features, openness, and concepts, but is greatly improved and is going to carry us all dynamically into the future. We are already operating at a level, in this pre-release version, that competes with large legacy offerings, both in security and in spam fighting accuracy. I say this honestly as I can, OpenEFA is better already and will be the standard in the coming years.

[ChrisDickens]

The new version incorporates the good parts of the EFA5, the features, openness, and concepts, but is greatly improved and is going to carry us all dynamically into the future. We are already operating at a level, in this pre-release version, that competes with large legacy offerings, both in security and in spam fighting accuracy. I say this honestly as I can, OpenEFA is better already and will be the standard in the coming years.

Greetings fellow e-mail warrior. Thank you so much for your team's efforts to modernize EFA, the progress is palpable and I'm excited to not only use the new system for my customers, but also to hopefully contribute because the code base has moved toward platforms I'm better equipped to work with. I've made enhancements for years to EFA since version 3 but there was no easy way to push back.

When I last spun up a test server on 11/23/2025, the installer script pulled from the GitHub repo, which installed what was reported at that time as v1.5.7.10. Today's installer reports version at 0.9.0 and the GitHub repo is showing 404 page not found. Has the available code gone back in time, or was there a version number reset and we are still on the latest? Are community contributions welcome via a GitHub in the near future, or are you moving towards closed-source or just source-available model?

Thanks!

[adrastosefa]

Not sure what happened, there, but within hours of a new release and I will ensure that the install script is listed correctly and all is right. I i will test the installer locally, then remove it, and install directly from the installer link. I will then post as soon as it is ready.

I am still figuring out github some, but have some people on the team that have a good handle on laying out Github. For the moment, it is setup as source available model, but that is by design or anything. I think the best way is by welcoming community contributions via github and also through discussion in the forum. We would also like to start a monthly video call where people can communicate visually and share experiences, suggestions, etc. What are your thoughts on that?