Background: 15 years of experience in software and apparently spoiled because it was already set up correctly.

Been practicing doing my own servers, published a test site and 24 hours later, root was compromised.

Rolled back to the backup before I made it public and now I have a security checklist.

  • Punkie@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    3
    ·
    3 months ago

    Basic setup for me is scripted on a new system. In regards to ssh, I make sure:

    • Root account is disabled, sudo only
    • ssh only by keys
    • sshd blocks all users but a few, via AllowUsers
    • All ‘default usernames’ are removed, like ec2-user or ubuntu for AWS ec2 systems
    • The default ssh port moved if ssh has to be exposed to the Internet. No, this doesn’t make it “more secure” but damn, it reduces the script denials in my system logs, fight me.
    • Services are only allowed connections by an allow list of IPs or subnets. Internal, when possible.

    My systems are not “unhackable” but not low-hanging fruit, either. I assume everything I have out there can be hacked by someone SUPER determined, and have a vector of protection to mitigate backwash in case they gain full access.

    • feddylemmy@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      2
      ·
      3 months ago
      • The default ssh port moved if ssh has to be exposed to the Internet. No, this doesn’t make it “more secure” but damn, it reduces the script denials in my system logs, fight me.

      Gosh I get unreasonably frustrated when someone says yeah but that’s just security through obscurity. Like yeah, we all know what nmap is, a persistent threat will just look at all 65535 and figure out where ssh is listening… But if you change your threat model and talk about bots? Logs are much cleaner and moving ports gets rid of a lot of traffic. Obviously so does enabling keys only.

      Also does anyone still port knock these days?

      • kernelle@0d.gs
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        1
        ·
        3 months ago

        Also does anyone still port knock these days?

        Enter Masscan, probably a net negative for the internet, so use with care.

        • davidgro@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          1
          ·
          3 months ago

          I didn’t see anything about port knocking there, it rather looks like it has the opposite focus - a quote from that page is “features that support widespread scanning of many machines are supported, while in-depth scanning of single machines aren’t.”

      • josefo@leminal.space
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        1
        ·
        3 months ago

        Literally the only time I got somewhat hacked was when I left the default port of the service. Obscurity is reasonable, combined with other things like the ones mentioned here make you pretty much invulnerable to casuals. Somebody needs to target you to get anything.

  • Hozerkiller@lemmy.ca
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    2
    ·
    3 months ago

    I’ve gotta say this post made me appreciate switching to lemmy. This post is actually helpful for the poor sap that didn’t know better, instead of pure salt like another site I won’t mention.

    • Tablaste@linux.communityOP
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      2
      ·
      3 months ago

      I shared it because, out there, there is a junior engineer experiencing severe imposter syndrome. And here I am, someone who has successfully delivered applications with millions of users and advanced to leadership roles within the tech industry, who overlook basic security principles.

      We all make mistakes!

      • LordCrom@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        1
        ·
        3 months ago

        There’s a 40 year I.T. veteran here that still suffers imposter syndrome. It’s a real thing I’ve never been able to shake off

        • pulsewidth@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          1
          ·
          3 months ago

          Just look at who is in the White House, mate - and not just the president, but basically you can pick anyone he’s hand-picked for his staff.

          Surely that’s an instant cure for any qualified person feeling imposter syndrome in their job.

  • kibiz0r@midwest.social
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    2
    ·
    3 months ago

    One time, I didn’t realize I had allowed all users to log in via ssh, and I had a user “steam” whose password was just “steam”.

    “Hey, why is this Valheim server running like shit?”

    “Wtf is xrx?”

    “Oh, it looks like it’s mining crypto. Cool. Welp, gotta nuke this whole box now.”

    So anyway, now I use NixOS.

  • Rentlar@lemmy.ca
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    1
    ·
    3 months ago

    I do worry about putting up public servers that other people might rely on because there’s something I might not realize making it vulnerable.

    So far I have pubkey root login only on the VPSs I’m messing around with, but my ol’ reliable private key from 6 years ago might be beginning to fall behind on encryption standards.

  • ohshit604@sh.itjust.works
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    1
    ·
    edit-2
    3 months ago

    I can’t even figure out how to expose my services to the internet, honestly it’s probably for the best Wireguard gets the job done in the end.

    • Valmond@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      0
      ·
      3 months ago

      I’m interested, how do you expose your services (on your PC I assume) to the internet through wireguard? Is it theough some VPN?

      • Zanathos@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        1
        ·
        3 months ago

        Wireguard IS a VPN. He has somehow through his challenges of exposing services to the internet, exposed wireguard from his home to the internet for him to connect to. Then he can connect to his internal services from there.

        It’s honestly the best option and how I operate as well. I only have a handful of items exposed and even those flow through a DMZ proxy before hitting their destination servers.

        • Valmond@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          1
          ·
          edit-2
          3 months ago

          Oh, I thought it was a protocol for virtual networks, that merely VPNs used. The more you know!

          Edit: spelled out VPN 😅

      • ohshit604@sh.itjust.works
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        1
        ·
        3 months ago

        VPN’s are neat, besides the fact they’re capable of masking your IP & DNS they’re also capable of providing resources to devices outside a network.

        A good example is the server at my work is only accessible on my works network, to access the server remotely without exposing it directly to the internet would be to use a VPN tunnel.

  • gerryflap@feddit.nl
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    1
    ·
    3 months ago

    I’ve been quite stupid with this but never really had issues. Ever since I changed the open ssh port from 22 to something else, my server is basically ignored by botnets. These days I obviously also have some other tricks like fail2ban, but it was funny how effective that was.

    • kureta@lemmy.ml
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      1
      ·
      3 months ago

      Almost the same here. I also change some ssh settings: disable root login, disable password, allow only public key login. That’s about it. I never had any problems.

    • surph_ninja@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      0
      arrow-down
      1
      ·
      3 months ago

      We’re not really supposed to expose the ssh port to the internet at all. Better to hide it behind a vpn.

      But it’s too damn convenient for so many use cases. Fuck it. Fail2Ban works fine.

      You can also set up an ssh tarpit on port 22, which will tie up the bot’s resources and get them stuck in a loop for a while. But I didn’t think it was worth attracting extra attention from the bot admins to satisfy my pettiness.

    • LordCrom@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      1
      ·
      3 months ago

      If it’s public facing, how about dont turn on ssh to the public, open it to select ips or ranges. Use a non standard port, use a cert or even a radius with TOTP like privacyIdea. How about a port knocker to open the non standard port as well. Autoban to lock out source ips.

      That’s just off the top of my head.

      There’s a lot you can do to harden a host.

  • satans_methpipe@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    2
    arrow-down
    1
    ·
    edit-2
    3 months ago

    On a new linux install or image I will always:

    • Make new users(s)
    • Setup new user to sudo
    • Change ssh port
    • Change new user to authenticate ssh via key+password
    • Disable root ssh login
    • stebator@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      2
      ·
      3 months ago
      • Setup new user to sudo

      I hope it is not a passwordless sudo, it is basically the same as root.

    • njordomir@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      2
      ·
      3 months ago

      That’s more or less the advice I’ve gotten as well. I’ve also read good things about fail2ban which tries to ban sources of repeated authentication failures to prevent brute force password attempts. I’ve used it, but the only person who has managed to get banned is myself! I did get back in after the delay, but I’m happy to know it works.

  • DaCrazyJamez@sh.itjust.works
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    1
    ·
    3 months ago

    As a linux n00b who just recently took the plunge and set up a public site (tho really just for my own / selfhosting),

    Can anyone recommend a good guide or starting place for how to harden the setup? Im running mint on my former gaming rig, site is set up LAMP

  • frezik@midwest.social
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    1
    ·
    3 months ago

    I’m having the opposite problem right now. Tightend a VM down so hard that now I can’t get into it.

  • mlg@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    1
    ·
    3 months ago

    Lol you can actually demo a github compromise in real time to an audience.

    Make a repo with an API key, publish it, and literally just watch as it takes only a few minutes before a script logs in.

  • Fair Fairy@thelemmy.club
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    1
    arrow-down
    1
    ·
    3 months ago

    I’m confused. I never disable root user and never got hacked.

    Is the issue that the app is coded in a shitty way maybe ?

    • Xanza@lemm.ee
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      1
      ·
      3 months ago

      You can’t really disable the root user. You can make it so they can’t login remotely, which is highly suggested.

        • Xanza@lemm.ee
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          2
          ·
          3 months ago

          There’s no real advantage to disable the root user, and I really don’t recommend it. You can disable SSH root login, and as long as you ensure root has a secure password that’s different than your own account your system is just as safe with the added advantage of having the root account incase something happens.

          • Possibly linux@lemmy.zip
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            0
            ·
            3 months ago

            That wouldn’t be defense in depth. You want to limit anything that’s not necessary as it can become a source of attack. There is no reason root should be enabled.

            • Faresh@lemmy.ml
              link
              fedilink
              English
              arrow-up
              1
              ·
              3 months ago

              I don’t understand. You will still need to do administrative tasks once in a while so it isn’t really unnecessary, and if root can’t be logged in, that will mean you will have to use sudo instead, which could be an attack vector just as su.

            • Xanza@lemm.ee
              link
              fedilink
              English
              arrow-up
              1
              ·
              3 months ago

              Why do like, houses have doors man. You gotta eliminate all points of egress for security, maaaan. /s

              There’s no particular reason to disable root, and with a hardened system, it’s not even a problem you need to worry about…

    • cley_faye@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      1
      ·
      3 months ago

      You can’t really disable it anyway.

      Hardening is mostly prevent root login from outside in case every other layer of authentication and access control broke, do not allow regular user to su/sudo into it for free, and have a tight grip on anything that’s executable and have a setuid bit set. I did not install a system from scratch in a long time but I believe this would be the default on most things that are not geared toward end-user devices, too.

    • Tablaste@linux.communityOP
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      0
      ·
      edit-2
      3 months ago

      I published it to the internet and the next day, I couldn’t ssh into the server anymore with my user account and something was off.

      Tried root + password, also failed.

      Immediately facepalmed because the password was the generic 8 characters and there was no fail2ban to stop guessing.

      • lud@lemm.ee
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        0
        ·
        3 months ago

        Don’t use passwords for ssh. Use keys and disable password authentication.

        • Voroxpete@sh.itjust.works
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          0
          ·
          edit-2
          3 months ago

          More importantly, don’t open up SSH to public access. Use a VPN connection to the server. This is really easy to do with Netbird, Tailscale, etc. You should only ever be able to connect to SSH privately, never over the public net.

          • troed@fedia.io
            link
            fedilink
            arrow-up
            1
            ·
            3 months ago

            It’s perfectly safe to run SSH on port 22 towards the open Internet with public key authentication only.

                • DefederateLemmyMl@feddit.nl
                  link
                  fedilink
                  arrow-up
                  0
                  ·
                  3 months ago

                  A VPN like Wireguard can run over UDP on a random port which is nearly impossible to discover for an attacker. Unlike sshd, it won’t even show up in a portscan.

                  This was a specific design goal of Wireguard by the way (see “5.1 Silence is a virtue” here https://www.wireguard.com/papers/wireguard.pdf)

                  It also acts as a catch-all for all your services, so instead of worrying about the security of all the different sshds or other services you may have exposed, you just have to keep your vpn up to date.

            • jatone@lemmy.dbzer0.com
              link
              fedilink
              English
              arrow-up
              0
              ·
              edit-2
              3 months ago

              we’re probably talking about different things. virtually no distribution comes with root access with a password. you have to explicitly give the root user a password. without a password no amount of brute force sshing root will work. I’m not saying the root user is entirely disabled. so either the service OP is building on is basically a goldmine for compromised machines or OP literally shot themselves in the root by giving root a password manually. something you should never do.

              • satans_methpipe@lemmy.world
                link
                fedilink
                arrow-up
                0
                arrow-down
                1
                ·
                edit-2
                3 months ago

                Yeah I was confused about the comment chain. I was thinking terminal login vs ssh. You’re right in my experience…root ssh requires user intervention for RHEL and friends and arch and debian.

                Side note: did you mean to say “shot themselves in the root”? I love it either way.

              • satans_methpipe@lemmy.world
                link
                fedilink
                arrow-up
                0
                arrow-down
                1
                ·
                3 months ago

                Ah fair enough, I know that’s the basis of a ton of distros. I lean towards RHEL so I’m not super fluent there.

  • nonentity@sh.itjust.works
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    0
    ·
    3 months ago

    Permitting inbound SSH attempts, but disallowing actual logins, is an effective strategy to identify compromised hosts in real-time.

    The origin address of any login attempt is betraying it shouldn’t be trusted, and be fed into tarpits and block lists.

    • varnia@lemm.ee
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      1
      ·
      3 months ago

      Endlessh and fail2ban are great to setup a ssh honeypot. There even is a Prometheus exporter version for some nice stats

      Just expose endlessh on your public port 22 and if needed, configure your actual ssh on a different port. But generally: avoid exposing ssh if you don’t actually need it or at least disable root login and disable password authentication completely.

      https://github.com/skeeto/endlessh https://github.com/shizunge/endlessh-go https://github.com/itskenny0/fail2ban-endlessh

    • DefederateLemmyMl@feddit.nl
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      1
      ·
      3 months ago

      If it is your single purpose to create a blocklist of suspect IP addresses, I guess this could be a honeypot strategy.

      If it’s to secure your own servers, you’re only playing whack-a-mole using this method. For every IP you block, ten more will pop up.

      Instead of blacklisting, it’s better to whitelist the IP addresses or ranges that have a legitimate reason to connect to your server, or alternatively use someting like geoip firewall rules to limit the scope of your exposure.