PHP, TLS, etc… We appear to be facing a tsunami of vulnerabilities being discovered in record time. Further, the window to act on these vulnerabilities has basically closed to zero; hackers’ tools now automatically fold the very latest vulnerabilities into their botnets within minutes/hours of discovery. I have always been extremely reluctant to expose any of my services - even with the latest and greatest security tools. My choice to stay totally within the confines of tailscale seems vindicated given this week’s news. How are you all taking this?

https://pwn.watch/

  • lemmyvore@feddit.nlEnglish
    13·
    3 days ago

    I also practice domain/IP obfuscation in addition to high port:

    • TLS certs are wildcard certs, so bots can’t get my subdomains from transparency logs.
    • My DDNS IP is on a subdomain (random string) not on the base domain.
    • My public services are also on random subdomains, CNAME’d individually to the IP subdomain.
    • There is no wildcard CNAME that the bots can query to get the IP.

    This eliminates scanning almost completely. They can’t find an IP to go with my base domain, first of all. And even if a bot is scanning the IPv4 address space and all the ports and it finds the reverse proxy it can’t get past it without knowing a FQDN. I still get the occasional hit from such bots but it’s very rare.

    Also, all my public services are secured with mTLS (preferably) or at the very least a long key in a custom HTTP header (both enforced at the proxy).

    • Blip6338@lemmy.caEnglish
      1·
      20 hours ago

      You should also use a default self-signed cert for something generic like “localhost” on your reverse proxy so random IP scan don’t see any domain when they hit your IP, but legitimate queries coming through the domain name still see the right cert.

      • lemmyvore@feddit.nlEnglish
        2·
        6 hours ago

        In my case I have defined a fallback in Caddy so any request that doesn’t match one of the explicitly handled domains will be an error.

        I use a route {} block with handle {} blocks inside it, and the last handle has an error directive in it.

        https://*.example.com {
  route {
    @foo host "foo.example.com"
    handle @foo {
      reverse_proxy http://whatever:12334/
    }
    ... more proxy hosts ...
    handle {
      error 400
    }
  }
}

        The route block is essential here because handlers inside a route block are processed strictly in the order they are defined. Outside route blocks that is not true, caddy will try to optimize and can execute directives in any order it sees fit.