this post was submitted on 04 May 2025
118 points (96.1% liked)

Selfhosted

60742 readers
160 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:

Detailed Rules Post

  1. Be civil.

  2. No spam.

  3. Posts are to be related to self-hosting.

  4. Don't duplicate the full text of your blog or readme if you're providing a link.

  5. Submission headline should match the article title.

  6. No trolling.

  7. Promotion posts require active participation, with an account that is at least 30 days old. F/LOSS without a paywall has exceptions, with requirements. See the rules link for details. Tags [CBH] or [AIP] are required, see the links in Rule 8 for details.

  8. AI-related discussions and AI-involved promotional posts have additional requirements for tagging, as noted in Rule 7 and the AI & Promotional Post Expanded Rules post, and find example disclosures here.

Resources:

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

Questions? DM the mods!

founded 3 years ago
MODERATORS
 

Hey all, i've decided I should probably setup something else to help block nefarious IP addresses. I've been looking into CrowdSec and Fail2Ban but i'm not really sure the best one to use.

My setup is OpnSense -> Nginx Proxy Manager -> Servers. I think I need to setup CrowdSec/Fail2Ban on the Nginx Proxy Manager to filter the access logs, then ideally it would setup the blocks on OpnSense - but i'm not sure that can be done?

Any experience in a setup like this? I've found a few guides but some of them seem fairly outdated.

Edit: thanks everybody for the great info. General consensus seems to be with crowdsec so I'll go down that path and see how it goes.

Edit 2: So after having it up and running for the better part of a day, i'm going to remove it again. For some reason there was a performance impact loading websites, probably because it was waiting for a response from the Crowdsec hub? Either way, after stopping it from running everything is back to normal again. So I might revisit how I do it and probably try Fail2Ban now instead. Thanks everybody

you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[–] SirMaple__@lemmy.ca 1 points 1 year ago* (last edited 1 year ago) (1 children)

I've been thinking about going this route. What size subnet are you banning? /24?

Only thing stopping me is I selfhost email and don't want to ban say a whole subnet from Microsoft/Azure and end up blocking the outgoing servers for O365. I'm sure I can dig around and look at the prefixes to see which are used for which of their services just haven't had the time yet.

[–] mbirth@lemmy.ml 4 points 1 year ago (1 children)

I let CrowdSec determine that. I'm seeing /13, /12 and even /10 in my decisions list. All seem to be Amazon AWS ranges.

[–] sudneo@lemm.ee 2 points 1 year ago

Wow, those are big networks. Obviously I suppose in case of AWS it doesn't matter as no human visitor (except maybe some VPN connection?) will visit from there.

As someone who bans /32 IPs only, is the main advantage resource consumption?