This has everything to do with port 22 being open. Botnets constantly scan for that port because it’s the easiest way in to systems. This is why it’s always a bad idea to open SSH to the public unless a couple of measures are taken. Using a non-default port is not really protection, but it can help prevent a lot of attempts of lazy bots that just try port 22. But most importantly would be to use certificate based authentication, have something like fail2ban enabled and if possible a second factor.
So you can secure it, but unless you really need it, you just shouldn’t have it exposed to begin with.
As @Vadim said, this is normal and not related to Storj. Any system with any publicly visible ports will get scanned and will get login attempts. That’s not to say that you shouldn’t take that seriously. Just make sure you only open what you need open and you protect what you open. NEVER EVER open telnet, don’t open SSH and don’t tempt spammers by opening SMTP (email) server ports. Those are the most common ones for abuse.
A golden rule in cyber security is to disable all unneeded services. You should never allow inbound Internet ports to your systems unless required. You should disable all ports that are port forwarded except those specifically required for the application such as TCP 28967.
Thanks everyone. I turned off all portforwarding.
I have been reading about the payout structure and I do not understand it completely, I have started with 3.5 and can add more in the 2nd bay. To get an idea of how long does it take to fill 3.5TB and how much approx the payout would be for 4TB and corresponding egress and ingress bandwidth?
if you need to use ssh on your server from another location just change the ssh port on your router when you forward it … what i mean is internal port 22 external port 2222 for example and thats it … 22 is common port for ssh and 24/7 hackers scan range a IP classes on ssh trying to bruteforce, so that happens !
Please don’t JUST do this. This is security through obscurity, which is no security at all. It’s trivial to do a port scan for other open ports and super common for botnets to do that and attempt logins on any exposed port.
If you ever expose SSH publicly you must have either super long random passwords (the type you can’t remember) or preferably certificate based authentication. You will also need to have fail2ban or similar to block IP’s after a number of login attempts.
Just changing the port does nothing except lower the amount of failed logins you’ll see in logs. It’s good to do, but only in addition to the other measures. It does nothing to protect you on its own.
man, we are in 2021 , openssh-server up-to-date have already enough security and ignore IP after multiple logins failtoban etc (you just need to use a strong password) , nobody will start doing port scan for specific IP … most likely his IP is DHCP to … his problem was a class range scan and happens to everybody who has ssh on 22 open … hackers scan a class IP range all day for example they scan class 80...* if your IP starts with 80 you will get ssh login attempts if your port is 22 ! First thing you should do is change the ssh port if you dont want those issues (this simple shittt is the best move first) … after that add whatever security you wish !
Your message sure sounds like you disagree with something I said. Yet you give the exact same advise. Strong passwords and fail2ban. I think we’re in a heated agreement my friend!
Sure, this is most common. But plenty of botnets look for any open common port and if found follow it up by a quick port scan. If you have SSH open on any other port with an admin/admin login credential, it will get compromised. Just a matter of time. All I said was that changing port alone is not enough.
Yeah VPN is a good option too, but then the credentials and fail2ban advise applies to your VPN login.
Most of the recent vulnerabilities around mail have been Exchange via OWA and ECP on port 443 rather than 25. Most residential isp blocks have port 25 outgoing blocked. Patching Exchange has been a nightmare for many organisations. It was one reason O365 saw such a huge take up. For myself, as well as being fully patched, all my email goes through the Proxmox mail gateway service first (with appropriate filters and blacklists setup) and then on to Exchange. It is actually quite surprising how many End of life Exchange systems (like 2007) are still on line. Those things literally cannot be patched.
I think that is mostly a US thing. I know from experience that my ISP doesn’t block it. I tried setting up a mail server a while back, but kind of had to give up on it since mail from residential IPs is always ending up in spam boxes anyway. So it was basically useless. However, it didn’t stop spammers from giving it a go. In the logs I saw more failed login attempts for SMTP than for SSH. Of course I used very strong passwords and fail2ban. But the torrent of attempts never slowed down. Too many IPs to try from I guess. In the end I just shut it down and closed the ports as it wasn’t of any use to me anyway.
But yeah, exchange servers have indeed been a big problem recently. It’s a bit more of a sophisticated attack on those though. They actually abuse exploits, while the SMPT attacks are nothing more than just login attempts with common credentials.
You can get around the problem using services like smtp2go. They also help a lot with things like spf and dkim to improve email deliverability. SMTP2GO allows you to send the email via them on other ports besides 25. So using 2525 or 587 isn’t a problem. I was playing with a free account today to help out a client who has problems with emails from their scanner not going through O365 and my Exchange is also set to route outgoing mail via them.
Unfortunately, your issue was more than likely that while the DKIM and SPF validation was acceptable, the rDNS hostname and the hostname your mail server would identify itself as wouldn’t match. I know Outlook/Microsoft domains get really picky if the IP rDNS hostname doesn’t match the hostname that the mail server identifies itself as and typically will just drop the message instead of even putting it into spam. smtp2go would be a relay so it should be fine.