Sorbs blocking even though it's not in the RBL config?

[serverprodigy]

I keep getting reports from users trying to send mail in from gmail that they are getting bounce messages that Zimbra is rejecting their email due to a Sorbs block.

We had Sorbs in our RBL list but removed it a long time ago due to issues w/ good emails addresses being blocked.

I've tried whitelisting the addresses and verified Sorbs is no longer in the RBL config so why / how is it still able to show up like this?

[serverprodigy]

Here's a redacted header, this is really, really pissing the CEO off. I've added the entire gmail.com domain to the postfix whitelist per other threads with similiar issues. We DO NOT have sorbs in our RBL list so why is this happening?

Return-Path: xxx@gmail.com
Received: from mx1.xxx.xxx (LHLO mx1.xxx.xxx)
 (0.0.0.0) by mx1.xxx.xxx with LMTP; Fri, 25 Jan 2013
 19:27:53 -0500 (EST)
Received: from localhost (localhost.localdomain [127.0.0.1])
	by mx1.xxx.xxx (Postfix) with ESMTP id E3B0212F003A
	for <xuserx@xxx.xxx>; Fri, 25 Jan 2013 19:27:53 -0500 (EST)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at mx1.xxx.xxx
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -1.989
X-Spam-Level: 
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-1.989 tagged_above=-10 required=6.6
	tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, DKIM_SIGNED=0.1, DKIM_VALID=-0.1,
	DKIM_VALID_AU=-0.1, FREEMAIL_FROM=0.001, HTML_MESSAGE=0.001,
	SPF_PASS=-0.001, T_TO_NO_BRKTS_FREEMAIL=0.01] autolearn=ham
Authentication-Results: mx1.xxx.xxx (amavisd-new); dkim=pass
	header.i=@gmail.com
Received: from mx1.xxx.xxx ([127.0.0.1])
	by localhost (mx1.xxx.xxx [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024)
	with ESMTP id lYA7MM98OHN3 for <xuserx@xxx.xxx>;
	Fri, 25 Jan 2013 19:27:52 -0500 (EST)
Received: from mail-ia0-f175.google.com (mail-ia0-f175.google.com [209.85.210.175])
	by mx1.xxx.xxx (Postfix) with ESMTPS id A160312F0031
	for <xuserx@xxx.xxx>; Fri, 25 Jan 2013 19:27:44 -0500 (EST)
Received: by mail-ia0-f175.google.com with SMTP id r4so1514589iaj.6
        for <xuserx@xxx.xxx>; Fri, 25 Jan 2013 16:30:16 -0800 (PST)
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed;
        d=gmail.com; s=20120113;
        h=mime-version:x-received:in-reply-to:references:date:message-id
         :subject:from:to:content-type;
        bh=jzXVaYSfb/e9twxOQab5vC5QxeUHy6uRTcWWcSoSlWI=;
        b=cUnMFAl1mh2H+cKAZP6lNTyNwFfiqPsgWpjvWzlcDptBrjzz3vsLCgn+qFQ1R/hh6z
         tBH3bevbzalRNJo1RM6tGUNwjf1wVo/1TNWgP38BNQyQ85ZMBgZ/wnAitfE5Bd95+Maj
         8drKoMPyDhkfQMtApp9BjpwTeB4192g98n1gx1Y7Tlc22nSyHFRzf1nN5TUuy5QTLc51
         2WC6Yc53Uh9lg8NfH7diGVqBJPsaJhWEHXqS+j3oH2qlNoDgta0NeinlKIyYJ/Mw5HZ9
         ayqt9hGQ2zR18lBJI8LqFFDImmElSDHik0yCA41YfYKdu+7YECNz4aiNLen/nSo/zGfQ
         NY4g==
MIME-Version: 1.0
X-Received: by 10.50.189.233 with SMTP id gl9mr150254igc.81.1359160216289;
 Fri, 25 Jan 2013 16:30:16 -0800 (PST)
Received: by 10.64.33.104 with HTTP; Fri, 25 Jan 2013 16:30:16 -0800 (PST)
In-Reply-To: <14dae9340eaf8d803504d426203e@google.com>
References: <CAJRHCBKz72JBprCdWcA2rdSNjnBVgB4=8aEaz2bDUMT3jK2gtA@mail.gmail.com>
	<14dae9340eaf8d803504d426203e@google.com>
Date: Fri, 25 Jan 2013 19:30:16 -0500
Message-ID: <CAJRHCBLNWzsUzbYkY1yWH9YS_3eEWFpCwDpJFoqZPpXkFmkxBQ@mail.gmail.com>
Subject: Fwd: Delivery Status Notification (Failure)
From: xxx <xxx@gmail.com>
To: xuserx@xxx.xxx
Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary=14dae934078de2814304d42625fd

--14dae934078de2814304d42625fd
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1

More of the same bullshit you've said was fixed like a half dozen times.


---------- Forwarded message ----------
From: Mail Delivery Subsystem <mailer-daemon@googlemail.com>
Date: Fri, Jan 25, 2013 at 7:28 PM
Subject: Delivery Status Notification (Failure)
To: xxx@gmail.com


Delivery to the following recipient failed permanently:

     xuserx@xxx.xxx

Technical details of permanent failure:
Google tried to deliver your message, but it was rejected by the server for
the recipient domain xxx.xxx by mx1.xxx.xxx.
[0.0.0.0].

The error that the other server returned was:
554 5.7.1 Service unavailable; Client host [209.85.210.170] blocked using
dnsbl.sorbs.net; Currently Sending Spam See:
http://www.sorbs.net/lookup.shtml?209.85.210.170

----- Original message -----

DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed;
        d=gmail.com; s=20120113;
        h=mime-version:x-received:in-reply-to:references:date:message-id
         :subject:from:to:content-type;
        bh=o/hiRybeBOIZlsPqJ0+LVZAOvh/+RajVFJ68lkp052Q=;
        b=ssa4nZqSDtHWn1kKWKbl/q8l1Kk2omGrDig8FADcSymE62nhpqlxrHLbsreuv7pRV7

 NJ/owTGnIDs+q3kunQxG6fULLwdw74ove+Sx0MNw94U8KvV5+r5s6eafY2tSapoYE5Xo

 nVrucGKlvb9Lt3j78Jt5t3gGK9S8NLIF/rLmLk9I3der1iRFjg3tJGy1/E3xEmRhuvkd

 kjhOa7H/od7W7fXvHvBzCD6QN3FE3M8h/EhLAubSJbv0B0imq5xtF9pJVz1m2Cczs5gO

 wB2AzZYVx2QMdE+GjmSNBKCtoIcgnrCQPyeNNAMqohtBynxPnB11S/Y92smreaX6ICMr
         bLMQ==
MIME-Version: 1.0
X-Received: by 10.50.36.130 with SMTP id q2mr147293igj.81.1359160117717;
Fri,
 25 Jan 2013 16:28:37 -0800 (PST)
Received: by 10.64.33.104 with HTTP; Fri, 25 Jan 2013 16:28:37 -0800 (PST)
In-Reply-To: <
1286426866.65157.1359159508572.JavaMail.root@xxx.xxx>
References: <
CAJRHCBKiEMgRtMXX0nbJVv9mewMPhyqcWcdQXgSpUFj0c23rAQ@mail.gmail.com>
        <1286426866.65157.1359159508572.JavaMail.root@xxx.xxx>
Date: Fri, 25 Jan 2013 19:28:37 -0500
Message-ID: <CAJRHCBKz72JBprCdWcA2rdSNjnBVgB4=
8aEaz2bDUMT3jK2gtA@mail.gmail.com>
Subject: Re: Introduction

[ccelis5215]

Hello, it's cleary that you are in this blacklist.

[serverprodigy]

Hello, it's cleary that you are in this blacklist.

No, Sorbs is no longer active, this happens with every gmail sender and lastly, we do NOT have sorbs configured as an RBL in Zimbra so we should not be getting blocks attributed to Sorbs. Do you admin a mail server but don't know how to read a bounce header?

The error that the other server returned was:
554 5.7.1 Service unavailable; Client host [209.85.210.170] blocked using
dnsbl.sorbs.net; Currently Sending Spam See:
http://www.sorbs.net/lookup.shtml?209.85.210.170


209.85.210.170 is all of Google, by the way so that means every gmail address. So yes, they've listed all of gmail in Sorbs.

The point is we DO NOT have sorbs in our RBL config so it shouldn't matter. What we need to know is:

1; Why are we getting sorbs blocks without sorbs configured as a RBL in our system?
2; How can we stop this from happening?