WARE SEND / TECHNICAL DUE DILIGENCE
EXTERNAL TECHNICAL REVIEW

Technical Due Diligence

External technical reference for architecture, security, operations, continuity and risk review of Ware Send. It describes implemented controls and known boundaries and does not replace an independent audit.

Document
WS-TDD-001
Reviewed release
Engine 1.3.1 · API v1 · SMTP Submission 587/465 · Analysis v3.1
Classification
External use · no operational secrets
Vendor
DB Ware Company

Executive summary

Self-hosted outbound email delivery engine. HTTP API and authenticated SMTP Submission converge into the same queue. Ware Send is not an inbound MX, mailbox, POP3, IMAP or webmail product.

Ware SendAdmission, persistence, queue, scheduler, adaptive control and observability
Postfix / MTAExternal SMTP transport, queueing, retry and defer after local acceptance
Customer / infrastructureVPS/cloud, DNS, IP, reputation, use policies and operations

Controlled benchmark evidence — 100K

Real SMTP transport in a controlled environment. The receiver is a destination SMTP server that accepts and measures messages; it does not represent public-provider inbox policies.

MEASURED100.000/100.000accepted → Postfix → receiver · gap 0
Effective receiver28,83 msg/sP95 68,09 · peak 75,95
Multi-Domain1.000 domains100 recipients/domain · CV 0
Engine → Postfix99,992% reuse8 opens / 100.000 transactions
Host CPU23,2% avgpeak 53,8%
I/O pressure8,2% iowait avgPSI I/O some peak 55,2
ARITHMETIC PROJECTION74,7M / 30d7,47× the continuous rate required for 10M/30d
Adaptive / pressure55,2 PSI I/O peak308 transitions · run queue peak 14
RUN QUALITY: DIRTY: Postfix started with 1,963 queue/deferred items. The run is valid operational evidence but is not presented as maximum-capacity certification.
Ten million messages in 30 days require 3.86 msg/s continuously. The measured effective rate was 28.83 msg/s (7.47×); linear projection under the same conditions: 74.7M/30 days.
No attachment in this profile. Projections do not replace message-size-specific benchmarking and are not an inbox SLA.
Evidence: WS-BENCH-20260826-100K-MD1000 · wsba_20260826T133652_366c357f

Analysis methodology and where to measure

Each layer answers a different question. Due Diligence separates generator, Engine, MTA/receiver and external deliverability evidence.

Technology / evidenceMeasurement layerWhat it measuresUse in Due Diligence
Integration LabClient → Ware Send APIConcurrency, HTTP latency, TCP/TLS/TTFB, new vs reused/multiplexed connectionsIngress generator and integration efficiency
Engine AnalysisWare Send EngineDurable admission, LOAD/DRAIN phases, P50/P95/P99, scheduler, Adaptive, CPU/iowait/run queue/PSI, pending, Postfix submit latency, Queue-IDEngine bottlenecks and internal capacity
Benchmark AnalysisPostfix → controlled SMTP receiverMessages/recipients received, rates/percentiles, domain distribution, TCP sessions, end-to-end gapsControlled SMTP transport integrity and effective egress
Campaign Completion ReportWare Send → customer report addressCampaign accepted jobs/recipients, Postfix handoff, failures, retries, Queue-ID count, per-domain distribution, revisionCustomer-facing campaign completion at Ware Send/Postfix boundary
Postfix logs / DSNMTA → remote MXRemote SMTP replies, defer, bounce and DSN evidence when availableRemote delivery evidence beyond Ware Send completion
DNS / reputation / inbox testingPublic Internet / destination providerPTR, SPF, DKIM, DMARC, reputation/blocklists and provider-specific inbox placementDeliverability analysis outside Engine throughput
01

Product scope

Self-hosted outbound email delivery engine. HTTP API and authenticated SMTP Submission converge into the same queue. Ware Send is not an inbound MX, mailbox, POP3, IMAP or webmail product.

02

Architecture

Admission persists Message, Blob and Delivery before returning 202/250. A weighted-fair, domain-aware scheduler feeds a controlled Postfix active window. Postfix remains responsible for external SMTP, SMTP queueing and retry/defer after it accepts the message.

03

Security

API Bearer tokens and the SMTP password are separate credential domains. Full secrets are delivered once and only hashes remain on the server. SMTP requires TLS. The service runs without root and receives only the minimum capabilities required.

04

Data & privacy

Queue content and metadata remain on the customer-controlled VPS. DB Ware backend services are not in the critical path for each message. Blobs are shared per message to avoid per-recipient copies and are removed according to lifecycle and retention.

05

Reliability

HTTP 202 and SMTP 250 mean Ware Send accepted responsibility after a local durable commit. Recovery, atomic rename, fsync, quarantine and object GC protect the spool. Semantics remain at-least-once in the extreme window between Postfix acceptance and the local terminal-state commit.

06

Scheduler & Adaptive Engine

Weighted-fair/domain-aware scheduling uses cost classes, campaign/tenant fairness and per-domain limits. Adaptive Engine 1.3.x uses composite pressure: CPU, iowait, run queue, load, Linux PSI CPU/I/O/memory, backlog/Postfix growth and commit latency, with hysteresis.

07

Observability

Authenticated status, activity and analytics plus Analysis Report v3.1 with phase-aware percentiles, scheduler/Adaptive, PSI, Queue-ID and Engine→Postfix telemetry. Full-resolution evidence remains on the VPS while e-mail HTML embeds a bounded scalar timeline.

08

Delivery semantics

Ware Send distinguishes local acceptance from external delivery. When local SMTP submission to Postfix is enabled, the Postfix Queue-ID is captured for correlation. Remote-MTA acceptance does not equal inbox placement or human read confirmation.

09

Operations & continuity

Private installation flow, amd64/arm64 binaries, SHA-256 manifests, offline signed licensing, rollback and post-install validation. The server release directory may retain only the currently published release; continuity packages preserve source, documentation and build evidence.

10

Capacity & benchmark

On Aug 26, 2026 a controlled Multi-Domain run delivered 100,000/100,000 messages to a controlled SMTP destination server across 1,000 domains with zero gaps at an effective 28.83 msg/s. Ten million messages in 30 days require 3.86 msg/s; a linear projection of the measured rate is 74.7M/30 days under the same conditions. This is performance evidence, not an SLA or inbox guarantee.

Responsibilities

ComponentResponsibility
Ware SendAdmission, persistence, queue, scheduler, adaptive control and observability
Postfix / MTAExternal SMTP transport, queueing, retry and defer after local acceptance
Customer / infrastructureVPS/cloud, DNS, IP, reputation, use policies and operations

Known risks and boundaries

IDRecord
R-01There is no exactly-once guarantee across independent systems; the residual Postfix↔spool window is observable but not transactional.
R-02Inbox delivery cannot be inferred from HTTP 202, SMTP 250 or a local Queue-ID; remote/DSN evidence is required when available.
R-03The 100K benchmark started with 1,963 Postfix queue/deferred items and was classified DIRTY; it is controlled evidence, not a maximum-capacity certification.
R-04VPS, DNS, IP reputation and destination-MX policies remain operational variables outside Engine capacity.
Compliance posture

This material describes implemented technical controls. It does not claim SOC 2, ISO 27001, PCI DSS or any other certification unless separately obtained through an independent process.

Evidence register

IDAvailable evidence
E-01100K Multi-Domain controlled SMTP benchmark — 100,000/100,000, 1,000 domains, zero gaps
E-02Analysis Report v3/v3.1 — percentiles, phases, Adaptive, PSI and correlation
E-03Analysis export v3.1 — 129.2 MB → 1.53 MB (-98.8%) while raw evidence remains on the VPS
E-04Engine→Postfix — 100,000 transactions, 8 opened connections, 99.992% reuse, zero failures
E-05Go tests + race detector + vet and amd64/arm64 builds
E-06Release v4.5.1 manifests and SHA-256
E-07Campaign Completion Report and Developer API 1.3.x
E-08Service hardening, install, update and rollback procedures

Evidence can be presented during technical review according to applicable scope and authorization.