this post was submitted on 10 Sep 2023
0 points (NaN% liked)

Selfhosted

39227 readers
382 users here now

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.

Rules:

  1. Be civil: we're here to support and learn from one another. Insults won't be tolerated. Flame wars are frowned upon.

  2. No spam posting.

  3. Posts have to be centered around self-hosting. There are other communities for discussing hardware or home computing. If it's not obvious why your post topic revolves around selfhosting, please include details to make it clear.

  4. Don't duplicate the full text of your blog or github here. Just post the link for folks to click.

  5. Submission headline should match the article title (don’t cherry-pick information from the title to fit your agenda).

  6. No trolling.

Resources:

Any issues on the community? Report it using the report flag.

Questions? DM the mods!

founded 1 year ago
MODERATORS
 

To mitigate the effort to maintain my personal server, I am considering to only expose ssh port to the outside and use its socks proxy to reach other services. is Portknocking enough to reduce surface of attack to the minimum?

you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[–] tinsuke@lemmy.world 0 points 1 year ago (1 children)

Sounds like security through obscurity to me.

Highly susceptible to replay and man in the middle attacks.

If you're gonna combine that with another authentication method (and you should), then I see little advantage over just going with the other auth method.

[–] aksdb@feddit.de 0 points 1 year ago

Sure? It certainly detracts bots that now don't discover the SSH port anymore. Against a targeted attack it's less useful, but that is a very hard problem in any case. If someone is out to get you specifically, it will be a tough battle.