Selfhosted

59353 readers

541 users here now

A place to share alternatives to popular online services that can be self-hosted without giving up privacy or locking you into a service you don't control.

Rules:

Be civil: we're here to support and learn from one another. Insults won't be tolerated. Flame wars are frowned upon.
No spam posting.
Posts have to be centered around self-hosting. There are other communities for discussing hardware or home computing. If it's not obvious why your post topic revolves around selfhosting, please include details to make it clear.
Don't duplicate the full text of your blog or github here. Just post the link for folks to click.
Submission headline should match the article title (don’t cherry-pick information from the title to fit your agenda).
No trolling.
No low-effort posts. This is subjective and will largely be determined by the community member reports.

Resources:

selfh.st Newsletter and index of selfhosted software and apps
awesome-selfhosted software
awesome-sysadmin resources
Self-Hosted Podcast from Jupiter Broadcasting

Any issues on the community? Report it using the report flag.

Questions? DM the mods!

founded 3 years ago

MODERATORS

HybridSarcasm@lemmy.world

HybridSarcasm@lemmy.hybridsarcasm.xyz

First VPS — Is 54 SSH bans in 12 hours normal? (lemmy.ml)

submitted 2 weeks ago by tanka@lemmy.ml to c/selfhosted@lemmy.world

58 comments fedilink hide all child comments

So it's my first time setting up a VPS. Is it to be expected to ban 54 IPs over a 12h timespan? The real question for me is whether this is normal or too much.

$ sudo fail2ban-client status sshd
Status for the jail: sshd
|- Filter
|  |- Currently failed: 3
|  |- Total failed:     586
|  `- Journal matches:  _SYSTEMD_UNIT=ssh.service + _COMM=sshd
`- Actions
   |- Currently banned: 51
   |- Total banned:     54
   `- Banned IP list:   [list of IPs]

fail2ban sshd.conf

$ sudo cat /etc/fail2ban/jail.d/sshd.conf 
[sshd]
enabled = true
mode = aggressive
port = ssh
backend = systemd
maxretry = 3
findtime = 600
bantime = 86400

I have disabled SSH login via password. And only allow it over an SSH key.

$ sudo sshd -T | grep -E -i 'ChallengeResponseAuthentication|PasswordAuthentication|UsePAM|PermitRootLogin'
usepam no
permitrootlogin no
passwordauthentication no

you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments

[–] Scrollone@feddit.it 3 points 1 week ago (1 children)

They can't or they don't?

[–] trackball_fetish@lemmy.wtf 4 points 1 week ago (1 children)

My question too, pretty sure you can

[–] pHr34kY@lemmy.world 9 points 1 week ago* (last edited 1 week ago) (1 children)

The smallest possible subnet has 18.4 quintillion addresses.

You can't scan it before encountering the heat death of the universe.

Outgoing connections are made on a different address that does not accept incoming connections. You never disclose your real IP when browsing.

So, no. It can't be done.

[–] possiblylinux127@lemmy.zip 4 points 1 week ago (1 children)

That's only if you use the brute force method

IPs are not secret and can be leaked in various ways. Don't count on IPv6 as a security mechanism as that's not what it was designed to do

[–] pHr34kY@lemmy.world -2 points 1 week ago* (last edited 1 week ago) (1 children)

It's literally called "IPv6 privacy extension". It's what it does.

Unless you're in the middle and fowarding the packets, you won't stumble across a connectable IPv6 endpoint.

[–] possiblylinux127@lemmy.zip 6 points 1 week ago

The IPv6 privacy extensions are something else entirely and are not used for anything server side

You should research IPv6 port scanning techniques. It is harder than IPv4 but still doable depending on the context. If your goal is simply to reduce network traffic due to bots that's one thing. However, it should not be considered a security mechanism.