Solved it guys, did some googling on that SSL error and found another post here: In /var/unbound Delete dnsbl_cert.pem unbound_control.key unbound_control.pem unbound_server.key unbound_server.pem Reboot and run force update/reload. DNSBL now up and running. Thanks for the help in diagnosing guys.

I have the same problem but also my google home is blocking, i have added some IP adresses of google but not helped me. Anyone a suggestion about that? I think i am not the anyone that this problem have with Google services.

@kiokoman Aha, that makes much more sense! Thanks!

Amigos, a solução para o meu problema foi aumentar as entradas máximas da tabela do firewall no campo: System / Advanced / Firewall e NAT Mudei o valor padrão de 400000 para 800000, mas o valor fica a critério de cada um de acordo a sua necessidade.

@riaanwest said in pfblockerng: Basically making pfblockerng to create an alias for each category referenced in shallalist so you can create manual firewall rules using those aliases pointing to lets say social networks? You can't use FW_Rules with DNSBL tables. DNSBL operate on the Domain Name space. Firewall rules operate on the IP space.

DNSBL will block domains, it cannot block based on a URL as it is a DNS based blocker.

@newyork10023 said in pfBlockerNG rule element modification and ordering: To begin, pfBlockerNG_devel 2.2.1_2 is awesome. Wow. Thanks. Thanks! Certain feeds are naughty. For example, adding RFC 1918 (Private Address Space), Multicast addresses, etc., etc., etc., is just BAD. Blocking possibly necessary system addresses, including multicast addresses, etc., is just NASTY. Adding a WhiteList is not going to fix this issue. These rule elements need to be culled from the list(s), and I mean permanently. By chance are you using Firehol Level1? That feed contains bogons and should not be used for Outbound blocking. You can also enable "Suppression" which will remove local/loopback addresss. A couple of feature suggestions for automatic rule insertion: use rule Separators to bind automatic rule insertion to specific places in the rules. (Indeed, one of my pet peeves is that automatic rules re-arrange Separator organization in seemingly random ways.). Another suggestion would be that automatic rule insertion should not re-arrange rule ordering AT ALL (after their initial placement). Subsequent rule updates should update rules IN PLACE. I like the possibility that Separators could be used to bind automatic rule insertion. But, disabling all automatic rule insertion needs to be an option for DNSBL. Firewall rule separators will be very difficult to implement with pfBlockerNG and auto rules...