Blacklist

Terminology

There is a lot more to say here, and I’m working on a longer post to really talk about the underlying racism in tech and how we as an industry have failed.

The SpamCannibal blacklist – one that didn’t affect your email too much but which would panic users who found it on one of the “check all the blacklists!” websites – has gone away.
It was silently abandoned by the operator at some point in the past year and the domain registration has finally expired. It’s been picked up by domain squatters who, as usual, put a wildcard DNS record in for the domain causing it to list the entire internet.
Al has more details over at dnsbl.com.
If you run a blacklist, please don’t shut it down this way. Read up on the suggested practice in RFC 6471. If you just can’t cope with that consider asking people you know in the industry for help gracefully shutting it down.
Blacklist health checks
If you develop software that uses blacklists, include “health check” functionality. All relevant blacklists publish records that show they’re operating correctly. For IP based blacklists that means that they will always publish “127.0.0.2” as listed and “127.0.0.1” as not listed. You should regularly check those two IP addresses for each blacklist and if 127.0.0.1 is listed or 127.0.0.2 isn’t listed immediately disable use of that list (and notify whoever should know about it).
For IPv6 blacklists the always listed address is “::FFFF:7F00:2” and the never listed address is “::FFFF:7F00:1”. For domain-based blacklists the always listed hostname is “TEST” and the never listed hostname is “INVALID”. See RFC 5782 for more details. (And, obviously, check that the blacklists your software supports out of the box actually do implement this before turning it on).
If you use someone else’s blacklist code, ask them about their support for health checks. If your mail filter doesn’t use them you risk either suddenly having all your mail go missing (for naive blacklist based blocking) or having some fraction of wanted mail being delivered to your spam folder (for scoring based filters).

Asking for help with a blocklist

There are often questions arising about how to go about getting off a particular blocklist. A few years ago I led the MAAWG effort to document what to if if you were On a Blocklist (pdf link). That document was aimed primarily at MAAWG members and deliverability experts with working knowledge of blocklists. I think, even now, it’s a good background on how to deal with a listing and mail being blocked.

There have been discussions on multiple mailing lists over the last week or so about how to deal with listings at different blocklists. Many folks on these lists have extensive experience, so these are good places to ask. With that being said, a lot of the requests lack sufficient details to help.
So, if you’re ever on a blocklist and want some help from a mailing list about the problem, here’s a short guide for how to ask for help.

How many blocklists do we need?

There’s been a discussion on the mailop list about the number of different blocklists out there. There are discussions about whether we need so many lists, and how difficult the different lists make it to run a small mail system (80K or so users). This discussion wandered around a little bit, but started me thinking about how we got to a place where there are hundreds of different blocklists, and why we need them.

There is a lot of history of blocklists, and it’s long, complicated and involves many strong and passionate personalities. Some of that history is quite personal to me. Not only do I remember email before spam, I was one of MAPS’ first few employees, albeit not handling listings. I’ve talked with folks creating lists, I’ve argued with folks running lists. For a while I was the voice behind a blocklist’s phone number.
The need, desire and demand for different lists has come up over the years. The answer is pretty simple: there are many different types of abuse. One list cannot effectively address all abusive traffic nor have policies that minimize false positives.
Lists need different policies and different delisting criteria. The SBL lists based on volume of email to addresses that are known to have not opted in to receive mail. The PBL lists IPs where the IP owner (usually an ISP) says that the IPs are not supposed to be sending mail by their policy. URIBL and SURBL list domains, not IPs. Some lists have delisting requirements, some let listees remove themselves.
The policies of listing and delisting are not one size fits all, nor should they be.
There are two widely used lists that have significantly different delisting policies: the SBL and the CBL.
The SBL focuses on IP addresses they believe are under the control of or supporting the services of spammers. They measure this by primarily relying on spamtraps, but they also accept forwarded mail from some trusted individuals. Getting delisted from the SBL means explaining to Spamhaus what steps were taken to stop the spam from coming. It’s a manual process with humans in the loop and can require significant business process changes for listees. (We’ve helped dozens of companies resolve SBL listings over the years, contact us if you need help.)
On the other hand, the CBL is a mostly automated list. It lists ources of mail that aren’t real mail servers sending real mail, but are sending a lot of stuff. As they describe it:

Ongoing subscription attack

Brian Krebs posted a couple days ago about his experience with the subscription bomb over the weekend. He talks about just how bad it was over the weekend.

Spamhaus comments on subscription attack

Steve Linford, CEO of Spamhaus commented on my blog post about the current listings. I’m promoting it here as there is valuable information in it.

Subscription bombing, ESPs and Spamhaus

A number of ESPs woke up to a more-than-usually-bad Monday morning. Last night Spamhaus listed 10s of networks, including ESPs, on the SBL. The listings all contained the following note:

Fake DNSBLs

Spamhaus ~~recently~~ announced a few years ago that they have discovered a company that is pirating various blocklists, relabeling them and selling access to them. Not only is the company distributing the zones, they’re also running a “pay to delist” scheme whereby senders are told if they pay money, they’ll be removed from the lists.
The fake company does remove the listing from the fake zones, but does nothing to remove the IP from the original sender. This company has been caught in the past and was blocked from downloading Spamhaus hosted zones in the past, but have apparently worked around the blocks and are continuing to pirate the zone data.
It’s not clear how many customers the blocklist has, although one ESP rep told me they were seeing bounces referencing nszones.com at some typo domains.
No legitimate DNSBL charges for delisting. While I, and other people, do consult for senders listed on the major blocklists, this is not a pay for removal. What I do is act as a mediator and translator, helping senders understand what they need to do to get delisted and communicating that back to the blocklist. I work with senders to identify good, clean addresses, bad address segments and then suggest appropriate ways to comply with the blocklist requirements.

Five-Ten blacklist retired

The Five-Ten website has a notice that they have retired the blacklist. Five-Ten wasn’t the greatest list for blocking mail, they aggressively listed senders and there were a number of false positives against a standard mail stream. But it was useful as a touchpoint. If I had a client that wasn’t listed on Five-Ten that told me something about their normal practices.