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.
For Example
We welcome posts that include suggestions for good self-hosted alternatives to popular online services, how they are better, or how they give back control of your data. Also include hints and tips for less technical readers.
Useful Lists
Disable password auth.
Enable key only auth.
Add in TOTP 2FA (google authenticator).
Randomize the port (reduce bots) that forwards to 22.
Configure lockout to block upon 3 failed attempts, for a long duration like 1 year. (Have a backup access on LAN).
Ensure only the highest encryption ciphers are accepted.
Ensure upgrades are applied to sshd at least monthly.
If you are going all out, may as well add hosts.deny and hosts.allow.
Add port knocking, if we go all out, let's go all out!
Easy to do with known internal networks.
Difficult to manage when roaming.
Absolutely, just sometimes people forget those tools even exist. Of course, you can easily do the same thing with firewall rules as well.
Also, that was a great tidbit about the pam email notification on successful logon. I haven't seen that one before, thank you!!
If you disable password authentication, and use public key authentication, yes.
As long as password auth is disabled you’re fine. No one is cracking your RSA key. You can add Fail2Ban to reduce the log noise, but security wise it’s fine.
Likely better behind a VPN. This was reported recently. https://thehackernews.com/2023/11/experts-uncover-passive-method-to.html?m=1
Change your port.
No one's cracking a proper implementation of RSA, but not every implementation is proper. A little obscurity can't hurt.
Just waiting for everyone to come in saying you shouldn’t do this lol. Yes, changing the port is a nice little bonus. It doesn’t any extra security, but it moves you out of the way from the automated bots that scan the internet trying recent 0days. You’ll probably see a reduction of 99% traffic hitting the service and the only logs will be real people.
disabling password login and use pubkey authentication will be safe enough?
Just make sure you actually disable password login. Simply enabling key doesn't disable password. So as long as the password is disabled then you're fine.
Get fail2ban setup at a minimum
Better use some kind of VPN and only open the SSH port over the VPN interface.
No. Just VPN in and SSH in.
How is a VPN service more secure than an SSH service?
Both accept login.
Both provide can be brute forced / if using password.
WireGuard uses UDP and will not respond if the attacker doesn't have the correct key. So the port used by WG will appears as a closed port.
I've opened port 22 to specific IPv4 addresses, like my employer's, friends and family.
For any other IPv4 origin, its best to set up a VPN. It's trivial to set up wireguard.
You're probably safe to open port 22 for IPv6, as the address space is unfeasibly large to be scanned, but still, the secops in me doesn't like security by obscurity, so I don't. Also, there's evidence that hackers use things like IPv6 access logs on NTP to find accessible devices to target.
Honestly? Would not recommend it. Probably no one breaking in soon, but there are just constantly tons of botnets portscanning 22 over the whole IP range. You should at least think of switching ports, but I usually recommend at least having a vpn for ssh.
SSH exposed with key auth and not password is fine. It is the exact purpose of SSH after all. Also there are milions of web servers out there with exposed SSH because a lot of their users prefer to work with SSH and CLI instead of a web UI. Big hosts such as GoDaddy, BlueHost, Hostgate and so on, all expose their SSH. You don't see their servers crash and burn every week.
Or use something like Tailscale.com, secure private mesh vpn. No need to expose any ports.
Added feature that comes with it: https://tailscale.com/tailscale-ssh/
It’s also 100% free
I keep ssh on port 80, multiplexed with usual HTTP traffic thanks to sslh. Basically it's a protocol switchboard what detects what kind of traffic reaches your server and forwards it to appropriate service. It can distinguish between SSH/HTTP/OpenVPN and a few more.
Pros? Security wise probably nothing more that SSH already offers, but port 80 is rarely (if ever) blocked on other networks and having SSH on port that is non-standard and obscured, cuts way down on random attempts to guess the user/password combination.
This is my current hardened sshd configuration.
ssh/sshd_config: https://pastebin.com/7tH36TdJ
pam.d/sshd: https://pastebin.com/eqkisf4F
Yes and no.
Yes if you have the resources to monitor and update. Companies have entire teams dedicated to this.
No if you don't have the resources/time to keep up with it regularly.
IMO, no need to take this risk when you have services like Tailscale available today.
Is always better to randomize your ssh port, you will be safe from some scans
Using a non-standard port for SSH doesn't make it safer but it greatly reduces noise in your logs. If you only use it yourself, change the port.
I recommend implementing a VPN (wireguard is working very well for me) and through that do ssh
Most likely it's fine. Though it's not terribly difficult to set up some flavor of VPN so you're not exposing 22 at all outside your network. Personally I use Wireguard.
I would not do this, people port scan all the time and thats an easy one to look for. Try using an at home vpn like openvpn or in the very least change the ssh port to something odd like 6854 or whatever.
I have a port 22 ssh process that denies everything, and a separate ssh process on a different port that accepts logins as normal. So someone could obviously find the hidden one, but it won't be the apparently-functional one that they can hit day and night and never get any results from.
Move it to a four digit port on your router and port for to 22 internally.
With PubKey and Fail2Ban its probably ok but wouldnt chance it personally. Can you use a different port too?
I would risk it. After all, it's the only thing protecting my entire gitlab account. If someone could break my ssh, they could do what they want to my gitlab presence,and I'm guessing someone at gitlab is paid and qualified to make that call.
Port forwarding will work, but it has major downsides
There are far better and safer alternatives that I would recommend over exposing a raw port to the world.
Port knocking could be useful here
A VPN will always be better for this purpose, but as long as you properly secure your SSH server, shouldn't be a problem
Yes, but you should change the port