← Back to home
Comparison · Comms

Rspamd vs Stalwart

A side-by-side editorial comparison of Rspamd and Stalwart — release velocity, themes, recent moves, and the top alternatives to consider.

Rspamd vs Stalwart: at a glance

FeatureRspamdStalwart
SectorCommsComms
Velocity score5.05.0
Sparks · 30d00
Top themesspam filtering, input hardening, fuzzy matching, pdf extractionmail-server, jmap, imap, rfc-compliance
Last editorial update2d ago21h ago
WebsiteVisit →Visit →

What is Rspamd?

Rspamd closed a file-read hole any TCP client could reach, and taught the PDF parser to read fonts.

Rspamd's 4.1.x line is running two tracks at once: extending the neural and fuzzy subsystems it rebuilt earlier in the cycle, and auditing its own attack surface. 4.1.5 continues both — fuzzy storages now receive sender authentication facts over encrypted rules, the PDF parser decodes text through font encodings and ToUnicode CMaps, and the protocol gates File, Path and Shm message sources that any TCP client could previously use to have arbitrary files parsed. That gate ships as an opt-out now and an opt-in later.

Read the full Rspamd trajectory →

What is Stalwart?

Stalwart is chasing mail RFCs and its own storage layer at the same time

Stalwart ships roughly weekly, and the releases divide cleanly between standards implementation and correctness work. v0.16.18 turns toward resource control — bounds on decompressed inbound DMARC and TLS report size, a cap on RocksDB block-cache memory, column families tuned per access pattern, and a queue scheduler that stops rescanning from the earliest pending event. The preceding releases added IMAP UIDONLY, UIDBATCHES and MESSAGELIMIT, plus JMAP email push and VAPID.

Read the full Stalwart trajectory →

Rspamd vs Stalwart: editorial side-by-side

R
Rspamd
COMMS
5.0

Rspamd closed a file-read hole any TCP client could reach, and taught the PDF parser to read fonts.

◆ Current state

Rspamd's 4.1.x line is running two tracks at once: extending the neural and fuzzy subsystems it rebuilt earlier in the cycle, and auditing its own attack surface. 4.1.5 continues both — fuzzy storages now receive sender authentication facts over encrypted rules, the PDF parser decodes text through font encodings and ToUnicode CMaps, and the protocol gates File, Path and Shm message sources that any TCP client could previously use to have arbitrary files parsed. That gate ships as an opt-out now and an opt-in later.

◆ Where it's heading

Every release in this window has carried at least one security fix in the same class: a controller accepting any password on a malformed hash, a DKIM out-of-bounds read, MIME recursion depth, and now unauthenticated file reads. The project is systematically walking its own input paths rather than reacting to individual reports. Alongside it, the fuzzy subsystem keeps gaining structure — diagnostics, persisted shingle sets, and now shared sender reputation signals — turning what was a hash-match check into a scored, introspectable component.

◆ Prediction

The stated plan to flip allow_file_and_shm_inputs to false in the next major release makes that the visible breaking change to prepare for. Expect the fuzzy work to keep consolidating, since sharing SPF, DKIM and DMARC state with storages sets up cross-sender scoring that the current per-hash matching cannot express.

S5.0

Stalwart is chasing mail RFCs and its own storage layer at the same time

◆ Current state

Stalwart ships roughly weekly, and the releases divide cleanly between standards implementation and correctness work. v0.16.18 turns toward resource control — bounds on decompressed inbound DMARC and TLS report size, a cap on RocksDB block-cache memory, column families tuned per access pattern, and a queue scheduler that stops rescanning from the earliest pending event. The preceding releases added IMAP UIDONLY, UIDBATCHES and MESSAGELIMIT, plus JMAP email push and VAPID.

◆ Where it's heading

Two threads run through every release. One is RFC coverage across IMAP, JMAP, CalDAV and WebDAV, implemented close to the specification including drafts. The other is a long tail of protocol-conformance fixes, many of them cases where JMAP and IMAP disagreed about the same state. The newest release adds a third: memory and scheduling limits, which is what a server codebase starts doing when deployments get large enough for defaults to hurt.

◆ Prediction

Expect continued RFC additions across the JMAP and IMAP surfaces, with more of the storage-tuning work that v0.16.18 started as RocksDB deployments scale.

Alternatives to Rspamd and Stalwart

Other Comms products tracked by Sparkpulse, ranked by recent ship velocity. Each card links to a full editorial trajectory and lets you pivot into a head-to-head comparison with either Rspamd or Stalwart.

See all Rspamd alternatives → · See all Stalwart alternatives →

Recent activity from Rspamd and Stalwart

Latest ship moves from both products, interleaved chronologically. ⚡ = editorial spark.

  1. 1d agoStalwartResource limits arrive for inbound reports and RocksDB caches
  2. 3d agoRspamdCloses an arbitrary file read reachable by any TCP client
  3. 8d agoStalwartIMAP gains UIDONLY, UIDBATCHES and message-limit extensions
  4. 16d agoStalwartJMAP delivery push arrives; strict relays stop rejecting calendar mail
  5. 21d agoRspamdController accepted any password on a malformed hash
  6. 23d agoStalwartFix-only release: JMAP semantics and a credential escalation
  7. 24d agoRspamdFuzzy diagnostics API, and jQuery dropped from the WebUI
  8. 28d agoRspamdStatic embedding neural provider and composite Lua conditions
  9. 29d agoStalwartVAPID lands for JMAP Web Push
  10. 1mo agoStalwartFreeBSD support, plus OAuth scopes for IMAP, SMTP and Sieve
  11. 2mo agoRspamdPluggable neural feature and architecture registries
  12. 2mo agoRspamdLoad-aware upstream selection and chain-aware URL resolution

Frequently asked questions

What is the difference between Rspamd and Stalwart?

They serve adjacent needs but don't currently overlap on shipped themes. Rspamd and Stalwart are shipping at a similar cadence (velocity 5.0 vs 5.0, both within Sparkpulse's "active" band). See the at-a-glance table above for a side-by-side breakdown of velocity, recent sparks, and editorial themes.

Is Rspamd better than Stalwart?

Sparkpulse doesn't pick a winner — we score release velocity, not feature parity. Rspamd and Stalwart are shipping at a similar cadence (velocity 5.0 vs 5.0, both within Sparkpulse's "active" band). For your specific use case, the alternatives sections above list other Comms products to evaluate alongside.

What are the best alternatives to Rspamd?

Top Rspamd alternatives in Comms are ranked by recent ship velocity. Browse the "Rspamd alternatives" section above for the current picks, or visit /alternatives/rspamd for the full list with editorial commentary on each.

What are the best alternatives to Stalwart?

Top Stalwart alternatives in Comms are ranked by recent ship velocity. Browse the "Stalwart alternatives" section above for the current picks, or visit /alternatives/stalwart for the full list with editorial commentary on each.