this post was submitted on 14 Aug 2023
16 points (100.0% liked)

Selfhosted

40329 readers
371 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:

  1. Be civil: we're here to support and learn from one another. Insults won't be tolerated. Flame wars are frowned upon.

  2. No spam posting.

  3. 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.

  4. Don't duplicate the full text of your blog or github here. Just post the link for folks to click.

  5. Submission headline should match the article title (don’t cherry-pick information from the title to fit your agenda).

  6. No trolling.

Resources:

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

Questions? DM the mods!

founded 1 year ago
MODERATORS
 

In the past two weeks I set up a new VPS, and I run a small experiment. I share the results for those who are curious.

Consider that this is a backup server only, meaning that there is no outgoing traffic unless a backup is actually to be recovered, or as we will see, because of sshd.

I initially left the standard "port 22 open to the world" for 4-5 days, I then moved sshd to a different port (still open to the whole world), and finally I closed everything and turned on tailscale. You find a visualization of the resulting egress traffic in the image. Different colors are different areas of the world. Ignore the orange spikes which were my own ssh connections to set up stuff.

Main points:

  • there were about 10 Mb of egress per day due just to sshd answering to scanners. Not to mention the cluttering of access logs.

  • moving to a non standard port is reasonably sufficient to avoid traffic and log cluttering even without IP restrictions

  • Tailscale causes a bit of traffic, negligible of course, but continuous.

you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[–] notabot@lemm.ee 3 points 1 year ago (1 children)

You really shouldn't have something kike SSHD open to the world, that's just an unnecessary atrack surface. Instead, run a VPN on the server (or even one for a network if you have several servers on one subnet), connect to that then ssh to your server. The advantage is that a well setup VPN simply won't respond to an invalid connection, and to an attacker, looks just like the firewall dropping the packet. Wireguard is good for this, and easy to configure. OpenVPN is pretty solid too.

[–] douglasg14b@lemmy.world 0 points 1 year ago (2 children)

You say this and are downvoted.

While we are coming off the tail of Def Con where there where a plethora or small talks and live examples of taking advantage and abusing just this.

[–] teawrecks@sopuli.xyz 1 points 1 year ago

Just trying to parse your comment, I assume your first "this" and second "this" are referring to different things, right?

[–] u202307011927@feddit.de 0 points 1 year ago (1 children)

I don't understand your comment, what you are saying. Could you elaborate a bit, please? I'm interested why it's a bad idea what previous comment suggested.

Of course I can dig into DefCon videos and probably would do if needed, but perhaps you know what exactly the issue is

[–] MaggiWuerze@feddit.de 1 points 1 year ago

The first this means the comment he answered to and the second one means ssh being used as an attack surface, being described in defCon talks