From The Hacker News

  • Shdwdrgn@mander.xyz
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    16
    ·
    9 months ago

    Does anyone know of a linux tool that can immediately ban an IP address if they try to log in to ssh with specific user names? I see a ton of attempts in my logs for names like fax, mysql, admin, and of course root. Fail2ban only works if the same IP makes repeated attempts but I’m betting if I could generate a list from these failed attempts it would probably correlate with standard blocklists of compromised hosts. For that matter, is there a way to use an RBL to limit addresses that ssh will even accept? Of course none of these attempts have a chance of logging in, but it would still be nice to further limit my exposure for any future attacks.

    • StarDreamer@lemmy.blahaj.zone
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      13
      ·
      edit-2
      9 months ago

      Sounds like a job for crowdsec. Basically fail2ban on steroids. They already have a ban scenario for attempts to exploit web application CVEs. While the default ssh scenario does not ban specific usernames, I’m pretty sure writing a custom one would be trivial (writing a custom parser+scenario for ghost cvs from no knowledge to fully deployed took me just one afternoon)

      Another thing I like about crowdsec is the crowd sourced ban IPs. It’s super nice you can preemptively ban IPs that are port-scanning/probing other people’s servers.

      It’s also MIT licensed and uses less ram than fail2ban.

      • Shdwdrgn@mander.xyz
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        1
        ·
        9 months ago

        Hmm I keep hearing about it but haven’t looked into it. One thing I have set up between my systems if they share the blocked IPs with each other so every server drops a blocked address at the same time… I assume crowdsec has something similar for local sharing so I don’t have to wait for a blocked IP to be sent to them, added to the database, and sent back to my local machines again?

        • StarDreamer@lemmy.blahaj.zone
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          2
          ·
          edit-2
          9 months ago

          One way to do this would be set up crowdsec bouncers on each server but only run a single instance of the crowdsec daemon. Send all logs to the daemon and let it communicate with all the bouncers.

    • Daklon@beehaw.org
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      11
      ·
      9 months ago

      I think is better to not use an standard port and using fail2ban at the same time to avoid automated attacks. If you manage to implent what you are looking for, you are potentially telling an stacker which accounts exist and which not, allowing him to do an easier brute force attack. A typical attacker using a botnet will not be stopped by a single IP being baned, and as son as an IP is banned he will know that this account doesn’t exists. Another option is enabling port knocking.

      • Shdwdrgn@mander.xyz
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        4
        ·
        9 months ago

        Normally when an ssh login fails, it does so after the password attempt so no clue is given about which step failed. I would assume any type of RBL blocking would do the same, along with any available plugins that would ban based on a given username attempt?

        One good thing though… I just realized fail2ban actually has a rule for blocking based on invalid user names, so I need to update my settings to make use of that filter. That will likely take care of the large number of attempts I’m seeing since I do see a number of IPs being used over and over.

        • maiskanzler@feddit.de
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          5
          ·
          9 months ago

          Eh, those attempts are just noise anyway. Use proper pubkey auth instead of normal passwords and you’ll be fine. Any key size is probably enough to prevent successful bruteforce attacks. Anything above 2048 and there’s basically no chance for them to guess right within several years of constant trying. Most bots move along quickly as well, they try their predefined list of (common usernames) x (common passwords) and that’s it.

          Install endlessh, an ssh tar pit, if you want to make their lives a little more annoying. Use a non-standard port if your OCD can’t stand the slowly filling auth attempt logs.

          • Shdwdrgn@mander.xyz
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            1
            ·
            9 months ago

            Yeah they’re not getting in with my current setup anyway, I just prefer to also boot the failed attempts so I’m not relying on a single layer of protection – you never know what future security leak might rear its ugly head. I did get one issue with fail2ban fixed though so it is once again properly dropping what it can, but this bot seems to be really persistent and has quite a long list of available IPs to work from.

        • Daklon@beehaw.org
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          1
          ·
          9 months ago

          If I’m bruteforcing a server and each time that I try an username/password my IP gets banned but suddenly one combination allows me to do 4-5 test ( any bigger number than previously) you are potentially telling me that this user is different (it exists) than the previous ones. Therefore you are doing the attack easier for me because now I know which users actually exist in the machine. It doesn’t matter if you are locking the attacker after the password was given.

          As others told you, using public key auth, non standard ports or even port knocking will be much more useful.