Adding a DNSBL
Question asked by Gerardo Sobarzo - 12/29/2014 at 5:37 PM
As I can have a new DNSBL?
In the case enable timely desire is "DNSBL Chile"
Best regards

3 Replies

Reply to Thread
Employee Replied
Employee Post
Hello Gerardo,
Thank you for the inquiry. Can you please confirm if you are trying to configure the RBL or URBL in the SmarterMail application ?  I reviewed the website details for the various DNS entries for specific checks and there are a few examples provided.
You may need to setup a few Spam checks in SmarterMail to include these:
DNSBL responds with a value and a text according to eight categories, source of spam verified by dnsblchile.org (spam National Business IP) source of spam verified by dnsblchile.org (spam commercial IP abroad) source of scam verified by dnsblchile.org (spam scam, virus or Trojan) see http://www.dnsblchile.org/10.html (national IP not conform to RFC or dynamic) see http://www.dnsblchile.org/11.html (IP foreigner does not conform to RFC or dynamic) see http://www.dnsblchile.org/12.html (spam "snowshoe") see http://www.dnsblchile.org/13.html (national IP not comply with RFC) see http://www.dnsblchile.org/14.html (IP abroad not comply with RFC)
Steps for configuring a RBL / URIBL in SmarterMail 13x
Click on the Security Shield | AntiSpam Administration | Spam Checks | Add RBL / URIBL

RBL Lists (Real-Time Blacklists)

RBL lists (also known as IP4R Lists) and URIBL lists are publicly accessible lists of known spammer IP addresses. These lists can be a very important part of spam protection. To attach a list click either Add RBL or Add URIBL in the content pane toolbar. Dependent on the list you’re adding, the following settings are available:

  • Name - A friendly name for the list that will help you and your customers identify it.
  • Description - This field allows you to store additional information about the list.
  • Weight - The default weight for this spam check. If an email sender is listed with the spam list, this is the value that will be added to the message's total spam weight.
  • Max Weight - The maximum weight that a single URIBL check can add to the message.
  • Hostname - The hostname of the RBL.
  • Required Lookup Value(s) - The expected value(s) returned from an RBL if the sender's IP is listed with the RBL provider. Note: Multiple lookup values may be entered, separated by a comma.
  • Enable bitmap checking - Select this check box if the RBL supports bitmapping. Bitmap checking can be used for RBL’s and URIBL’s that support this kind of spam check. For example, SURBL utilizes a multi-blacklist check. For more information and documentation on the appropriate usage, please visit www.surbl.org/lists.
Thank You.
Gerardo Sobarzo Replied
Thank you very much for the help.
First, and sorry if the question is basic, what is the difference between rbl and urbl?
So according to the examples, I must add 8 categories you mention as follows:
Name: National bussiness ip spam
Descrption: dnsbl chile
Weight: 5
max weight: I do not know what value to use
hostname: dnsblchile.org
Required Lookup Value (s):
You can verify that this correct and clarify what the maximum weight?
Best Regards.
Employee Replied
Employee Post
Hello Gerardo,
Thanks for following up. I would classify the following as the basis of the difference between the two.

URIBL: Realtime URI Blacklist is a service that distributes information about domain names as they are related to email, primarily Unsolicited Bulk/Commercial Email (UBE/UCE). URIBL.COM serves this information via Public DNS, RSS Feeds, as well as local Data Feeds via rsync.

RBL: Realtime BlackList: A service that allows people to blacklist sites for emitting spam, and makes the blacklist available in real time to electronic-mail transport programs that know how to use RBL so they can filter out mail from those sites.
You may decide to setup each of the Spam checks for the DNSBL Chile site. You can obtain more details from their site or contact them on the specific IP's to use and the weights.  You have the details correct in your example.

Reply to Thread