this post was submitted on 10 Sep 2023
20 points (83.3% liked)

Selfhosted

38769 readers
534 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
[–] ShortN0te@lemmy.ml 0 points 11 months ago

I absolutely agree with your. It can makes sence the disable it for access control, loging, auditing, etc. .

But when you look online or just in the comment section here lots of ppl actually recommend it as a security meassure against attackers. "Need to brute force the username as well"