Re: Handling spam

[Christian Lynbech <christian@defun.dk>]

Thanks for the hint, I guess this is then shifting the analysis to work
on the formatted message rather than the raw.

It will actually not be hard to change my workflow to work on the
formatted message (all uncaught spam is manually moved to a separate
folder which I then process with a command I have written myself, this
command takes care to go to the raw message but I can just not do that).

                               /Christian

-----------------------
On Wed, Mar 22 2023, Andrew Cohen wrote:

>>>>> "CL" == Christian Lynbech <christian@defun.dk> writes:

    CL> Does any of you use gnus to handle spam, and if so, how do you
    CL> do it?  I have for quite some time been using the spam-stat
    CL> library that is bundled with emacs, but it is not working so
    CL> well for me.

[...]

    CL> So I am not sure what to do, either I need to teach the split
    CL> rule to look at the raw message or I need to retrain my spam
    CL> detection on formatted messages, something I can certainly do
    CL> but which perhaps is less efficient in distinguishing between
    CL> spam and non-spam. Certainly, being able to quickly process
    CL> whole directories is rather convenient.

You need to look at 'spam-stat-washing-hook:
  "Hook applied to each message before analysis."

With this you can manipulate the article before the spam analysis. A
common choice is

(require 'spam-wash)
(add-hook 'spam-stat-washing-hook 'spam-wash)

which will decode MIME encodings before doing the spam analysis.  I
don't recall if it deals with html email but you should be able to
modify the function 'spam-wash easily enough to do what you want.

Best,
Andy
-- 
Andrew Cohen