This is an old post. It may contain broken links and outdated information.

In the previous post, I discussed one possible method of keeping undesirables from connecting to your server via ssh: using the DenyHosts TCP wrapper to watch authentication attempts and block remote hosts based on conditions you set. DenyHosts (and other TCP wrappers) are easy to set up and don’t require much maintenance, but the block list files they generate can grow to a not-insignificant size; further, your web server must spend resources matching incoming ssh connection attempts against the block lists. If you’re on a particularly resource-constrained shared host, this might have some impact on overall server performance. Plus, even in its most recent update, DenyHosts can lag a bit in its blocking—because it uses regexes run against your server’s auth.log file to figure out what it needs to do, a remote attacker blasting out a tremendous number of logon attempts per second could get far above your allowed threshold of connection attempts in before DenyHosts drops the hammer.

There are lots of other things you can do to help secure your web server’s ssh port, but one of the most powerful and flexible is to bring iptables into the mix. Iptables is an applicaiton which comes preinstalled on most modern GNU/Linux distros and which provides instructions to the Linux kernel firewall. It is not a firewall in and of itself; rather, it provides a (relatively) easy way to view and modify the way the system’s built-in firewall tracks, filters, and transforms the network packets it receives.

In this particular use case, we care about iptables’s ability to perform actions on incoming ssh packets, based on parameters we define. Specifically, we’re going to use it to track all incoming ssh requests, and then block any host that tries to connect too many times. This is a simpler and more robust approach than the one DenyHosts takes, and the advantages are that it is self-maintaining and not dependent on log file parsing to work.

(Special thanks to my friend and mentor RB for passing along his feedback on the previous post and the instruction on how to get rolling with iptables!)

Read more

This is an old post. It may contain broken links and outdated information.

Running any kind of server at all is a risk, because the internet is a bad place full of bad people who like to destroy things for fun (and if you don’t believe me, read this). It becomes a matter of risk management—you have to expose certain things, like TCP ports 80 and maybe 443, for your web server to be reachable; you also probably need to expose at least one management port somewhere so that your server can be poked and prodded should things go wrong with it.

This usually means exposing port 22 for ssh if you’re on some kind of Unix-ish operating system like we are here at the Bigdinosaur.org compound. Blindly exposing your ssh port is not without peril, but there are several things you can do to manage the risk—namely, moving the ssh daemon onto a different port; controlling which local accounts are allowed to log on via ssh; and most importantly, installing and configuring something like DenyHosts, a TCP wrapper designed to help keep undesirables from being allowed to log on at all.

Read more

Most people use a NAT router at home for connecting to the Internet, and most consumer-grade NAT routers offer some limited version of DHCP for automatically handing out IP addresses to desktops and laptops and game consoles and smartphones and some limited version of DNS for making sure all the devices on the network know what all the other devices are called. However, the feature set and functionality of these cut-down DHCP and DNS instances are almost always too limited to handle more than the simplest of network designs; sometimes, you need to be able to do more. For example, if you wanted to set up a separate DHCP zone for handing out addresses to untrusted wireless clients versus trusted clients, or if you wanted to do something more awesome like implement the Upside-Down-Ternet, you’d need something a lot more configurable than the little NAT router’s applications.

There are lots of options, but it’s easiest to just pull out the big guns and set up BIND9, the current version of the DNS software that powers the Internet, along with the ISC’s DHCP server. DNS and DHCP are like peas and carrots, as the saying goes—DHCP hands out the addresses, but doesn’t communicate to other network hosts who has what address; DNS knows how to correlate names to addresses but doesn’t hand out addresses itself. In this post, we’ll set up DNS and DHCP on Ubuntu, and then configure them to work together.

(NB. This blog entry ended up being bloody huge, because I don’t just list the configuration options to set but rather go into detail on what each one does. I’d intended to bang the post out in a single evening, but instead it’s taken a couple of hours over three days to complete. I hope it is informative and helpful!)

Read more

This is an old post. It may contain broken links and outdated information.

The first thing I ever saw of Minecraft was this video of an impossible waterslide which stretched up across the sky and down through footless caverns. I was entranced, and started playing shortly after that. Minecraft is primarily a sandbox game where you dig for resources and build things, all in glorious faux 8-bit graphics. Of late its creators have tried to turn it into a really bad Zelda clone, but fortunately it’s possible to ignore all the worthless stupid shit they keep adding and instead play it in the proper manner. It can be played single- and multiplayer, and while I normally hate playing with anyone online, Minecraft is my exception.

In October of 2010 I decided to download the Minecraft server application and take a stab at running my own Minecraft server, so that my buddies and I could have a private place to build things without worrying about random crazy people from the Internet kknocking down our sandcastles. There were some errors along the way, but I’ve settled on some guidelines and methods that have worked out very well for me.

Read more