On 08/14/2013 05:08 PM, John Hardin wrote:
On Wed, 14 Aug 2013, Axb wrote:
On 08/14/2013 04:51 PM, John Hardin wrote:
On Wed, 14 Aug 2013, Kevin A. McGrail wrote:
> On 8/14/2013 9:49 AM, Nigel Smith wrote:
> > > > This triggers :
> > * 30 ITS_RCVD_IN_ZEN RBL: Received via a relay in Spamhaus Zen
> > * [10.10.114.156 listed in zen.dnsbl]
> > 10.X is a private network. Why is Zen listing it?
A better question is: why is the RBL check code even querying about an
RFC1918 address at all?
I can't think of any use case where that would be valid behavior. I'd
suggest this is worthy of a bugzilla entry.
If he borked his rbldnsd config badly, it could be possible.
What does the rbldnsd config have to do with whether or not a RBL lookup
on a RFC1918 address makes any sense?
If you mix all zones into one generic, DBL's IP entries may get leaked
into IP BLs - never tried such a thing, but i could imagine it happening.
