puppetlabs/firewall and fail2ban

[Daniele Sluijters]

Hello,

A while back I wanted to switch our home-brewed iptables module to the puppetlabs/firewall module but I couldn't figure out

how to tell puppetlabs/firewall to leave the fail2ban chains alone.

I was curious if someone had solved the issue and had some examples I can work from?

-- 

Daniele Sluijters

[Donald Hoffman]

--
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "Puppet Users" group.
To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to puppet-users...@googlegroups.com.
To view this discussion on the web visit https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/puppet-users/28d07962-a86c-46ad-9ddb-02e7ae41c348%40googlegroups.com.
For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/groups/opt_out.

I ran in to this issue also.  Never found a scaleable/supportable solution, so switched to DenyHosts instead just to get the deployment going.   I used the puppetlabs-denyhosts module.    Depending on your application an app-level filter vs a firewall-level filter may be adequate.  The latter is possibly more scalable if you are getting massive attacks on your SSH port for example.   But if they get so massive that DenyHosts is a significant resource drain you may need to switch to an upstream DDoS-blocking solution anyway, so I decided the app-level filter was sufficient.

Don

[Daniele Sluijters]

Hi,

DenyHosts is not an option for me since I can't predict which hosts will be connecting from the outside. Fail2ban solves that issue by looking for odd behaviour instead of asking me to whitelist.

Thanks for the suggestion though,

-- 

Daniele Sluijters

[Donald Hoffman]

On Oct 29, 2013, at 12:00 PM, Daniele Sluijters <daniele....@gmail.com> wrote:

> Hi,
>
> DenyHosts is not an option for me since I can't predict which hosts will be connecting from the outside. Fail2ban solves that issue by looking for odd behaviour instead of asking me to whitelist.
>
> Thanks for the suggestion though,
>
> --
> Daniele Sluijters

Hmm. Don’t quite follow. DenyHost works pretty much the same as fail2ban on the detection side. I.e. “looking for odd behavior". See this entry from their FAQ: http://denyhosts.sourceforge.net/faq.html#1_5

The DenyHost daemon monitors /var/log/secure for various signs of unsuccessful attempts to connect (from anywhere). Once a threshold is reached a rule for that IP address is inserted in to /etc/host.deny. Pretty much has the same detection features as Fail2ban.

It is only on the filtering side where DenyHosts and Fail2ban really differ. Fail2ban sets up iptables firewall rules while DenyHosts adds entries to hosts.deny for filtering in the app (usually sshd) server daemon.

Don

[Donald Hoffman]

On reading your message, I think you are perhaps confusing the static Linux /etc/host.deny mechanism with the DenyHosts project. See http://denyhosts.sourceforg.net


Don

[Daniele Sluijters]

Hi,

Ah indeed, I misread the puppetlabs-denyhosts module. I had a look at the DenyHosts project but that seems limited to SSH alone. My fail2ban has rules that scan logs of our web servers, mail etc.

-- 

Daniele Sluijters

[Jonathan Gazeley]

Have a look at pam_shield. It can protect any services that use PAM for authentication (i.e. ssh, authenticated mail, but not web). It can use either null-routing or iptables rules for blocking. If you set it to use null-routing then it doesn't interfere with puppetlabs/firewall - we are using these two modules together without problems.

https://github.com/jtniehof/pam_shield

Cheers,
Jonathan

On 30/10/13 09:36, Daniele Sluijters wrote:

Hi,

Ah indeed, I misread the puppetlabs-denyhosts module. I had a look at the DenyHosts project but that seems limited to SSH alone. My fail2ban has rules that scan logs of our web servers, mail etc.

--�

Daniele Sluijters

On Wednesday, 30 October 2013 01:39:56 UTC+1, Don Hoffman wrote:

On reading your message, I think you are perhaps confusing the static Linux /etc/host.deny mechanism with the DenyHosts project. �See http://denyhosts.sourceforg.net

Don

On Oct 29, 2013, at 5:32 PM, Donald Hoffman <don.h...@gmail.com> wrote:

> On Oct 29, 2013, at 12:00 PM, Daniele Sluijters <daniele....@gmail.com> wrote:
>
>> Hi,
>>
>> DenyHosts is not an option for me since I can't predict which hosts will be connecting from the outside. Fail2ban solves that issue by looking for odd behaviour instead of asking me to whitelist.
>>
>> Thanks for the suggestion though,
>>
>> --
>> Daniele Sluijters
>

> Hmm. �Don�t quite follow. � DenyHost works pretty much the same as fail2ban on the detection side. �I.e. �looking for odd behavior". �See this entry from their FAQ: �http://denyhosts.sourceforge.net/faq.html#1_5
>
> The DenyHost daemon monitors /var/log/secure for various signs of unsuccessful attempts to connect (from anywhere). �Once a threshold is reached a rule for that IP address is inserted in to /etc/host.deny. � Pretty much has the same detection features as Fail2ban.
>
> It is only on the filtering side where DenyHosts and Fail2ban really differ. �Fail2ban sets up iptables firewall rules while DenyHosts adds entries to hosts.deny for filtering in the app (usually sshd) server daemon.
>
> Don
>
>

--
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "Puppet Users" group.
To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to puppet-users...@googlegroups.com.

To view this discussion on the web visit https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/puppet-users/d03394af-4bf0-4bc0-b250-d3d125a22ab5%40googlegroups.com.