A screenshot of an email from Crowdsec saying they blocked 137k bots last week

all 16 comments

sorted by: hot top controversial new old
[–] 1 point 15 minutes ago

I have similar setup on my home server except my Crowdsec & Anubis live in a dockerised VPS proxy that tunnels over WireGuard to the real server behind OPNSense. Saves me a ton not having bandwidth obliterating AI crawlers hit my internet bill. As an added bonus, I can move or shutdown the public VPS entry if things get too 'spicy' without any downtime on connections via the VPN.

  • source
  • [–] 13 points 3 hours ago (7 children)

    crowdsec has always struck me as a really odd approach to security. You give out your logs to strangers and block IPs based on their say-so.

    The cause and effect are so far removed that I can't wrap my head about how it's supposed to be efficient. It's been proven in real-world tests that it lags badly behind the first waves of new vulnerabilities and by the time it starts blocking IPs that were related to those attacks the attackers have moved on and there are also patches available.

    The "thousands of IPs blocked" image reminds me of that WWII airplane bullet-holes image.

  • source
  • hideshow 7 child comments
  • [–] 4 points 1 hour ago* (1 child)

    I don't believe there are any logs being transferred, just the abusive IPs are shared with the central DB.

    So if an IP starts hitting a ton of rules (like .env access, repeated 403s, 404s, 429s, etc.. Or specific AppSec rules) then that IP is blocked and sent to their central DB where it's pushed out to everyone running crowdsec.

    On my setup crowdsec has been more effective than cloudflare at stopping scanners and bots from overloading things, cloudflare just lets basically everything through so I stopped using it.

    That said I'm curious if you remember the source of the real world tests, because I'd love to see what's actually better.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 1 child comment
  • [–] 1 point 27 minutes ago

    On my setup crowdsec has been more effective than cloudflare at stopping scanners and bots from overloading things

    Cloudflare is in the business of keeping infrastructure up and working. Any security benefits of CF are secondary.

  • source
  • parent
  • [–] [S] 2 points 51 minutes ago

    You're not wrong. If CrowdSec is your entire approach, it's a little weird. But I use it as a (small) part of my overall blocking strategy. I use other lists and frankly, block most IPs by default. Those other IPs aren't counted in the email screenshot though... only the CrowdSec based ones are coming through. I think a lot of the 137k above are just scanning bots to be frank.

  • source
  • parent
  • [–] 1 point 2 hours ago (2 children)

    Is there an alternative you suggest? I use Crowd-Sec in part because I don't know of anything else that does the same job. That is, blocks malicious IPs without snooping on all traffic content (looking at you, Cloudflare).

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 2 child comments
  • [–] 2 points 37 minutes ago (1 child)

    If your services are private they should be behind access authorization or completely private access. Scanning should be a non-issue.

    You can further mitigate scanning by getting wildcard certs, putting A/AAAA records on an obfuscated sub-domain rather than the base domain, and not using wildcard CNAME's.

    If they services are public you should be using a CDN anyway. If you don't like the way Cloudflare does things they're not the only CDN around, but some of the privacy issue is moot when running a public service.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 1 child comment
  • [–] 2 points 18 minutes ago

    I wouldn't say the privacy issues are moot when running public services, as metadata is quite valuable. Cloudflare will get a lot of information like who your visitors are, how often they visit, how long are they staying on a page yada yada

  • source
  • parent
  • [–] 15 points 6 hours ago (5 children)

    Tell us more about how crowdsec works (for you)!

    (Didn't even know it had a web ui)

  • source
  • hideshow 5 child comments
  • [–] [S] 2 points 55 minutes ago

    Sure. So OpnSense is the real gem here. Or really any solid firewall/edge device CrowdSec is an optional (free) add-on module in OpnSense. It's immediately operational at a minimal level without any registration. However, if you choose to register within the CrowdSec UI then you can load up more lists and tie it to your instance.

    I also load up Hagezi's Threat Intelligence Blocklists into my OpnSense firewall rules, which get updated (by him) on a rolling 12 hour basis. I also have OpnSense query Github every 12 hours to pull the updates.

  • source
  • parent
  • [–] 3 points 3 hours ago (3 children)

    It is pretty good I use it on many machines. You install it on your machine with a reverse proxy, it then analyses the traffic logs for malicious activity or for known bad IPs and then creates iptable block rules. The web interface is the cloud interface that it connects to, because as the name implies, it works by using log data from all members to block bad actors efficiently

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 3 child comments
  • [–] 1 point 3 hours ago (2 children)

    Why with a reverse proxy? I don't see this mentioned as the default installation method. https://doc.crowdsec.net/u/user_guides/building/

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 2 child comments
  • [–] 3 points 2 hours ago (1 child)

    You can use crowdsec without a reverse proxy and just block offending IPs using a firewall. However, you can optionally configure a reverse proxy to enforce decisions made by crowdsec, e.g. by serving error pages or by serving captchas. See Remediation Components (formally "Bouncers")

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 1 child comment
  • [–] 16 points 7 hours ago

    That's really cool. Would you mind posting a few sentences about how you redirected your specific solution and what it's protecting. That would be super helpful.

  • source