Re: moderately personalized spam sneaking past my SA. general approaches to fix it?

pgnd <[email protected]>
Newsgroups gmane.mail.spam.spamassassin.general
Message-ID <[email protected]>
You've missed the *already* tweaked/included KAM & DCC scores

	*  1.5 KAM_MXURI URI: URI begins with a mail exchange prefix, i.e.
	*  3.0 DCC_CHECK Detected as bulk mail by DCC (dcc-servers.net)

where, 'out of the box',

	/var/lib/spamassassin/4.000001/updates_spamassassin_org/50_scores.cf:score DCC_CHECK        0  1.1   0  1.1

and, of course, KAM's an (very useful!) add-on.

In any case, that's not the question ... I get lots of these.  Scores/test are low and all over the map.
It's clear I can tweak scores and add tests, whether in SA, KAM, or elsewhere.

I'm looking for a general approach that's less 'leaky' using SA.

-------- Original Message --------
From: [email protected]
Sent:  at Thursday, Nov 21, 2024, 13:24 PM EST
To: [email protected]
Subject: Re: moderately personalized spam sneaking past my SA. general approaches to fix it?

> On 11/21/24 18:42, pgnd wrote:
>> Starting about 2 weeks ago, I've been playing whack-a-mole with waves of 'your mail box is full' phish, e.g.
>>
>>      "Subject: The storage on your Webmail account is about full. You've used up all of the storage."
>>
>> , sneaking past my SA protections.  Whether to call it snowshoe, I dunno :-/  But my usually well fed Bayes isn't getting noticeably better with 'em.
>>
>> There's a modicum of badly-done personalization attempted in them.  It's usually laughably obvious spam to the eye.
>>
>> I'd like to make it go away with my filters.
>>
>> I can certainly do a bit of custom tweaking of SA scores, add header/ content exlcusions @ Postfix, etc.
>> I'm not beyond dropping the entire spammy ASN at my edges ...
>>
>> But, first, wondering what, if any, better 'standard' SA options for dealing with it are?
>>
>> So as not to spam the list, here's a gist with headers/content from one today,
>>
>>      https://gist.github.com/pgnd/5ab934d921939f4c62a4c978a30b9e6f
>>
>> Any general approaches to getting rid of this class of noise in SA?
>>
> 
> X-Spam-Status: NO, score=6.6 required=8.0
> 
> Using SA's default score of required 5.0 would have caught it
lmpx.com only provides a reader for public news (NNTP) servers. It is not affiliated with the servers or forums shown here and is not responsible for the content of articles, which is written by their respective authors.