• 0 Posts
  • 14 Comments
Joined 2 years ago
Cake day: August 9th, 2023
  • Waryle@jlai.lutoSelfhosted@lemmy.world•How to harden against SSH brute-forcing?English
    13·
    3 months ago

    You can look up for:

    • Setting up max authentication attemps per connection -> slows up a lot brute force attacks. If your password is strong enough, that’s already a big step to secure your server.
    • Generate SSH Keys and disable password authentication -> do this only if you’re connecting through the same devices, because you won’t be able to connect from any device that has not being set up. Personally I don’t use this because I want to be able to access my server even if I’m not home and without my laptop
    • Set up Crowdsec -> it’s a local service which scans logs and will block access to any suspicious IPs. It also relies on a crowdsourced list of IPs that are identified as threat and will preventively block them
  • Waryle@jlai.lutoTechnology@beehaw.org•I don't know who needs to hear this, but DO NOT EVER expose Jellyfin to the internet
    1·
    3 months ago

    https://www.legifrance.gouv.fr/juri/id/JURITEXT000030635061/

    Case law from the Cour de Cassation, where the defendant was convicted, by Articles 323-1 and 323-5, of having extracted data freely following a proven failure of the protection system.

    The complainant just had to show that the data SHOULD have been inaccessible, by expressing this “with a special warning” :

    "3°) alors qu’en l’absence de dispositif de protection des données, la maître du système doit manifester clairement et expressément manifester, par une mise en garde spéciale, sa volonté d’interdire ou de restreindre l’accès aux données ; qu’en déduisant de la seule présence d’un contrôle d’accès sur la page d’accueil du site de l’ANSES que M. X… s’était irrégulièrement maintenu dans le système contre le gré de son propriétaire, la cour d’appel a violé l’article 323-1 du code pénal ;

    Translated :

    “3°) whereas in the absence of a data protection system, the master of the system must clearly and expressly manifest, by means of a special warning, his intention to prohibit or restrict access to the data; that in deducing from the mere presence of an access control on the home page of the ANSES site that Mr. X… had irregularly maintained himself in the system against the owner’s will, the Court of Appeal violated article 323-1 of the French Penal Code ;

    In my case, the first thing you see when you arrive at my Jellyfin instance is a login form blocking your entry, and you have to go through a backdoor to access my data, so there’s no ambiguity on this point.

    You’re wrong, period. Stop trying to debate laws interpretation of a country you don’t even speak the language of.

  • Waryle@jlai.lutoTechnology@beehaw.org•I don't know who needs to hear this, but DO NOT EVER expose Jellyfin to the internet
    1·
    3 months ago

    Keeping that copy on a web accessible platform that is accessible by anyone on the internet(unauthenticated) isn’t covered by your rights at a bare minimum.

    It’s as accessible as my DVD collection in my living room: anyone can get into my home without a key by illegally breaking a window.

    Using a flaw in my Jellyfin to access my content is illegal and can’t be used against me to sue me, period. The idea of rights holders who would hack me to sue me is just plain ridiculous.

    Depending on the content “timing” if they trigger on something that doesn’t have a physical/consumer release yet… or all sorts of other “impossible” conditions. This is obviously reliant on what content you actually have on your server.

    And again, the only proof they would have could not be used in courts.

    For real, you’re just fear-mongering at this point.

    I was sincerely hoping someone would bring some real concerns, like how one of these security breaches listed in the OP could allow privilege escalation or something, but if all you got is “Universal might hire hackers to break through your server and sue you”, you’re comforting me in my idea that I don’t have much to fear

  • Waryle@jlai.lutoTechnology@beehaw.org•I don't know who needs to hear this, but DO NOT EVER expose Jellyfin to the internet
    1·
    3 months ago

    My Jellyfin server is behind Cloudflare with IP outside of my country banned.

    I got Crowdsec set up on Cloudflare, Traefik and Debian directly.

    I got Jellyfin up in a docker container behind Traefik, my router opens only 80 and 443 ports and direct them to Traefik.

    Jellyfin has only access to my media files which are just downloaded movies and shows hardlinked by Sonarr/Radarr from my download folder.

    It is publicly exposed to be able to watch it from anywhere, and share it to family and friends.

    So what? They might access the movies, even delete them, I don’t care, I’ll just hardlink them back or re-download them. What harm can they do that would justify locking everything down?