this post was submitted on 17 Apr 2024
80 points (97.6% liked)

Cybersecurity

5626 readers
107 users here now

c/cybersecurity is a community centered on the cybersecurity and information security profession. You can come here to discuss news, post something interesting, or just chat with others.

THE RULES

Instance Rules

Community Rules

If you ask someone to hack your "friends" socials you're just going to get banned so don't do that.

Learn about hacking

Hack the Box

Try Hack Me

Pico Capture the flag

Other security-related communities !databreaches@lemmy.zip !netsec@lemmy.world !cybersecurity@lemmy.capebreton.social !securitynews@infosec.pub !netsec@links.hackliberty.org !cybersecurity@infosec.pub !pulse_of_truth@infosec.pub

Notable mention to !cybersecuritymemes@lemmy.world

founded 1 year ago
MODERATORS
top 12 comments
sorted by: hot top controversial new old
[–] nbailey@lemmy.ca 28 points 6 months ago (2 children)

Anybody who’s ever exposed any service to the internet knows this as the “background radiation” of the net. My boxes get thousands of random connection attempts per day. The best practice for years has been to use keypairs and/or VPNs. Friends don’t let friends expose RDP to the web.

[–] lost_faith@lemmy.ca 12 points 6 months ago

I had a little linux server years ago and after a setup forgot to change my SSH port. One day I noticed my network was slow and after poking around realized that I had someone knocking at my port trying pass after pass with like 15 - 30 sec between attempts, watched this person for 2 days laughing at the 8-10 char passwords they were using, my password was a sentence. I then shifted the port to the 30k range and all was silent on my ports, always remember to change default ports, fun times

[–] WolfLink@lemmy.ml 3 points 6 months ago

I had a website exposed to the net and would constantly get http requests for things like “wordpress_admin.js”

[–] HubertManne@kbin.social 13 points 6 months ago (2 children)

I thought it was common practice to not allow logins for some period after like half a dozen failures.

[–] Darkassassin07@lemmy.ca 14 points 6 months ago (2 children)

There's a few ways to do it; but if they block based on username it can lockout legitimate users too.

This is what fail2ban is for. Too many failed auths from an IP and that whole IP is blacklisted for a day or two. This can still catchout vpn users, but it's still less disruptive.

[–] HubertManne@kbin.social 8 points 6 months ago

Many blocked for an hour or even just 10 mins. at the time it was enough to get the attack scripts to change targets.

[–] SemiAuto@sh.itjust.works 3 points 6 months ago

I went a bit overboard I think with my fail2ban configuration. If you fail 2 times to login in any admin interfaces (ssh, web, etc), you get banned for around 4880 days.. I have too many banned IPs already.. :/

[–] discozombie@lemmy.world 2 points 6 months ago (1 children)

Indeed but in this particular case they're using a large number of IPs, over 3000 on the last list I saw.

[–] HubertManne@kbin.social 2 points 6 months ago

yeah and im thinking from an early 2000 perspective to where not being able to login for an hour was not necessarily a big deal. Whereas now so much of our life is online its not really as laid back a proposition.

[–] Socsa@sh.itjust.works 12 points 6 months ago

This has happened to every SSH host on the internet for at least 20 years. Key based authentication is important folks.

[–] heavy@sh.itjust.works 5 points 6 months ago

Lol every day, brother

[–] Gooey0210@sh.itjust.works 4 points 6 months ago

I will tell you even more, half of these attempts come to my server