similar to: Nasty Fail2Ban update for Centos 7

P? Tue, 31 Dec 2019 18:53:38 +0000 John H Nyhuis <jnyhuis at uw.edu> skrev: > Just a random stab in the dark, but CEntOS6 was iptables, and CentOS7 > is firewalld. They take different fail2ban packages. > > CentOS6 = fail2ban > CentOS7 = fail2ban-firewalld > > Are you sure you are running the correct fail2ban package for your > firewall? (I screwed this up myself

Hi, I'm running CentOS 7 on an Internet-facing server. SELinux is in permissive mode for debugging. I've removed FirewallD and replaced it with a custom-made Iptables script. I've also installed and configured Fail2ban (fail2ban-server package) to protect the server from brute force attacks. Out of the box, Fail2ban doesn't seem to play well with SELinux. Here's what I

Just a random stab in the dark, but CEntOS6 was iptables, and CentOS7 is firewalld. They take different fail2ban packages. CentOS6 = fail2ban CentOS7 = fail2ban-firewalld Are you sure you are running the correct fail2ban package for your firewall? (I screwed this up myself before I noticed and fixed it...) Good Luck! Thanks, John H. Nyhuis Desk: (206)-685-8334 jnyhuis at uw.edu Box 359461,

Hi, Some time ago I had SELinux problems with Fail2ban. One of the users on this list suggested that it might be due to the fact that I'm using a bone-headed iptables script instead of FirewallD. I've spent the past few weeks getting up to date with doing things in a more orthodox manner. So currently my internet-facing CentOS server has a nicely configured NetworkManager, and

I have fail2ban on my mail server monitoring Dovecot and Exim. I have noticed that it has stopped banning IP's. I have seen in /var/log/fail2ban.log: 2020-04-07 09:42:05,875 fail2ban.filter [16138]: INFO [dovecot] Found 77.40.61.224 - 2020-04-07 09:42:05 2020-04-07 09:42:06,408 fail2ban.actions [16138]: NOTICE [dovecot] Ban 77.40.61.224 2020-04-07 09:42:06,981

Hi! I have a server running CentOS 7.7 (1908) with all current patches installed. I think this server should be a quite standard installation with no specialities On this server I have fail2ban with an apache and openvpn configuration. I'm using firewalld to manage the firewall rules. Fail2an is configured to use firewalld: [root at server ~]# ll /etc/fail2ban/jail.d/ insgesamt 12

On Fri, May 22, 2020 2:05 pm, Adi Pircalabu wrote: > On 22-05-2020 10:38, Voytek Eymont wrote: > > Hardly a Dovecot issue. Can you please post the output of this command? > /usr/bin/fail2ban-regex /var/log/dovecot.log > /etc/fail2ban/filter.d/dovecot.conf Adi, thanks, what I get is: # /usr/bin/fail2ban-regex /var/log/dovecot.log /etc/fail2ban/filter.d/dovecot.conf Running

On Friday 19 April 2019 16:15:32 Kenneth Porter wrote: > On 4/19/2019 5:30 AM, Gary Stainburn wrote: > > I've followed one of the pages on line specifically for installing fail2ban on > > Centos 7 and all looks fine. > > Which page? It would help to see what they advised. > On Friday 19 April 2019 16:15:32 Kenneth Porter wrote: > On 4/19/2019 5:30 AM, Gary Stainburn

On Feb 26, 2020, at 08:52, Nicolas Kovacs <info at microlinux.fr> wrote: > >> Le 26/02/2020 ? 11:51, Nicolas Kovacs a ?crit : >> SELinux is preventing /usr/bin/python2.7 from read access on the file disable. >> ***** Plugin catchall (100. confidence) suggests ***** >> If you believe that python2.7 should be allowed read access on the disable file by default.

On Mon, December 18, 2017 3:06 am, Alex JOST wrote: > Did you enable the dovecot service in fail2ban? By default all jails are > disabled. > > /etc/fail2ban/jail.conf: > [dovecot] > enabled = true Alex, thanks no, not in jail.conf, I've put it in the (1) /etc/fail2ban/jail.local I've also added postfix, that seems to work: I've made test failed dovecot and

Le 31/12/2019 ? 03:14, Allan a ?crit?: > Then gotta dig into Koji, to find the old version, download it, > and downgrade to that - and pew, everything is back to normal. > > The old one seems to be version 0.9.7 and the new one is 0.10.4 > > I haven't had time to look into Fail2Bans info about these 2 version, > but since there is a major version change - is it really

> > > > /var/log/fail2ban.log is showing that it's working: > > I have seem similar odd behaviour with f2b with other filters. > Try to uninstall the package > fail2ban-systemd > and stop and start fail2ban again. > This might change its behavior to the better. > The fail2ban-systemd package configures fail2ban to use systemd journal for log input. The OP

I am working to a CentOS 6 server with nonstandard iptables system without rule for ACCEPT ESTABLISHED connections. All tables and chains empty (flush by legacy custom script) so only filter/INPUT chain has rules (also fail2ban chain): Chain INPUT (policy ACCEPT) target prot opt source destination f2b-postfix tcp -- 0.0.0.0/0 0.0.0.0/0 ACCEPT all --

On a CentOS 6.7 system that's been running fail2ban for a long time, we recently started seeing this: ct 28 19:00:59 <servername> fail2ban.action[17561]: ERROR iptables -w -D INPUT -p tcp --dport ssh -j f2b-SSH#012iptables -w -F f2b-SSH#012iptables -w -X f2b-SSH -- stderr: "iptables v1.4.7: option `-w' requires an argument\nTry `iptables -h' or 'iptables --help' for

I use SSHGuard on well ssh (doh!), but supposedly you can use it for postfix and dovecot also. I can tell you it is well supported. I am on Centos 7 using firewalld. ? Original Message ? From: adi at ddns.com.au Sent: May 21, 2020 11:01 PM To: voytek at sbt.net.au Cc: dovecot at dovecot.org Subject: Re: fail2ban setup centos 7 not picking auth fail? On 22-05-2020 15:45, Voytek Eymont

Is anyone using asterisk with fail2ban? I have it working except it takes way more break-in attempts than what is set in "maxretry" in jail.conf For example, I get an email saying: "The IP 199.204.45.19 has just been banned by Fail2Ban after 181 attempts against ASTERISK." when "maxretry = 5" in jail.conf Perhaps someone else is experiencing this or has resolved it,

Hello List, with CentOS 7.2 it is not longer possible to run fail2ban on a Server ? I install a new CentOS 7.2 and the EPEL directory yum install fail2ban I don't change anything only I create a jail.local to enable the Filters [sshd] enabled = true .... ..... When I start afterward fail2ban systemctl status fail2ban is clean But systemctl status firewalld is broken ? firewalld.service -

Hi! Am 09.04.20 um 10:07 schrieb Rob Kampen: [...] > I too had fail2ban fail after an otherwise successful yum update. Mine occurred in Feb when my versions of firewalld etc were updated to the versions you show. Thus far I have not had the opportunity to sort the problem. Lockdown has been quite busy so far, hopefully some slower times coming next week. Yeah, those pesky real-life biological

Hello, I have a big problem with fail2ban and firewalld on my new system. I have a server running (CentOS 7.1) and run a Update to 7.2 on this system all is working ? BUT I install a new system with CentOS 7 1511 on this systems fail2ban don't work anymore. I have this error or more, in the firewalld 2015-12-19 08:39:55 ERROR: COMMAND_FAILED: '/sbin/iptables -w2 -t filter -I

Thanks, I did catch the mistype (after IU posted). Still no match with the typo fixed... :-( Thanks, John H. Nyhuis Desk: (206)-685-8334 jnyhuis at uw.edu Box 359461, 15th floor, 106 On 10/29/2019 4:03 AM, Tony Mountifield wrote: > In article <7025a0a8-1471-530d-dad0-3770e902ca31 at uw.edu>, > John H Nyhuis <jnyhuis at uw.edu> wrote: >> The mtx binary requires my tape