this post was submitted on 04 May 2025
110 points (96.6% liked)

Selfhosted

46671 readers
270 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 2 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 I've found a few guides but some of them seem fairly outdated.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
[–] catloaf@lemm.ee -1 points 1 day ago (2 children)

It would protect all the services. Instead of having to secure each one, you only expose the VPN server and connect to that. You don't have to worry about North Korean hackers breaching your services if they're not exposed at all, only the single VPN service. Less attack surface, less worry.

[–] JASN_DE@feddit.org 3 points 1 day ago

And basically useless if you need external users to be able to connect to the services.

[–] Quill7513@slrpnk.net 0 points 1 day ago

This is a scenario where a single node VPN would reduce, not increase OP's security stance. You do have to worry about NK hackers breaching your services because they're all exposed through the single node VPN server. Same attack surface, less knowledge needed to hit the target with the payload.