Facebook
Twitter-
Our team is looking to connect with folks who use email services provided by Plesk, or a premium service. If you'd like to be part of the discovery process and share your experiences, we invite you to complete this short screening survey. If your responses match the persona we are looking for, you'll receive a link to schedule a call at your convenience. We look forward to hearing from you!
-
We are looking for U.S.-based freelancer or agency working with SEO or WordPress for a quick 30-min interviews to gather feedback on XOVI, a successful German SEO tool we’re looking to launch in the U.S.
If you qualify and participate, you’ll receive a $30 Amazon gift card as a thank-you. Please apply here. Thanks for helping shape a better SEO product for agencies! -
The BIND DNS server has already been deprecated and removed from Plesk for Windows.
If a Plesk for Windows server is still using BIND, the upgrade to Plesk Obsidian 18.0.70 will be unavailable until the administrator switches the DNS server to Microsoft DNS. We strongly recommend transitioning to Microsoft DNS within the next 6 weeks, before the Plesk 18.0.70 release. -
The Horde component is removed from Plesk Installer. We recommend switching to another webmail software supported in Plesk.
Rule in Fail2Ban for ProFTPD Passive Mode (ports 30000-30400)
- Thread starter w00t
- Start date
@w00t
It is indeed the case that you can keep the plesk-proftpd jail active, that suffices.
The above follows from the fact that port 21 will be used for commands and authentication, irregardless of active or passive mode.
However, you have to be aware of the fact that someone can attack the passive ports themselves (for instance, to overload the entire system and/or break the ftp server).
The problem with Fail2Ban is that it is not the best tool for IP banning of attacks on passive ports.
In general, the default proftpd filter (provided with Plesk and used in the plesk-proftpd jail) is sufficient to handle the most common scenario´s for FTP related attacks, including attacks on the passive ports themselves.
In addition, the default recidive jail (provided with Plesk) would also handle a lot of the common scenario´s for (all) FTP related attacks.
The concrete problem with Fail2Ban is that the massive surface attack, offered by the multiple passive ports, cannot be handled perfectly, consistently and without a performance penalty.
I would certainly not recommend to create a separate jail and/or filter for handling of passive ports by Fail2Ban.
Instead, I would strongly advice to use the more common firewall, such as the Plesk Firewall (i.e. only allow known and trusted IP addresses on the passive ports).
Hope the above helps!
Regards....
It is indeed the case that you can keep the plesk-proftpd jail active, that suffices.
The above follows from the fact that port 21 will be used for commands and authentication, irregardless of active or passive mode.
However, you have to be aware of the fact that someone can attack the passive ports themselves (for instance, to overload the entire system and/or break the ftp server).
The problem with Fail2Ban is that it is not the best tool for IP banning of attacks on passive ports.
In general, the default proftpd filter (provided with Plesk and used in the plesk-proftpd jail) is sufficient to handle the most common scenario´s for FTP related attacks, including attacks on the passive ports themselves.
In addition, the default recidive jail (provided with Plesk) would also handle a lot of the common scenario´s for (all) FTP related attacks.
The concrete problem with Fail2Ban is that the massive surface attack, offered by the multiple passive ports, cannot be handled perfectly, consistently and without a performance penalty.
I would certainly not recommend to create a separate jail and/or filter for handling of passive ports by Fail2Ban.
Instead, I would strongly advice to use the more common firewall, such as the Plesk Firewall (i.e. only allow known and trusted IP addresses on the passive ports).
Hope the above helps!
Regards....
w00t
Basic Pleskian
This is a great idea, but actually enabling of passive mode and ports for this, was rather a forced measure. Because after the next regular update, for some reason the ftp-connection in active mode has ceased to function correctly, users can't get the listing of files from the server in active mode. I thought that this somehow related with the latest update. If someone could clarify this situation, I would be extremely grateful, because earlier all worked fine.
@w00t
You mentioned
This often is the endresult of ftp clients not working properly, but a failure on the server side cannot be excluded.
You should test a connection with (latest version of) Filezilla, set the connection logging to verbose and present the output in a post.
I can then have a look at the issue and where the problem originates from.
Regards....
You mentioned
.
This often is the endresult of ftp clients not working properly, but a failure on the server side cannot be excluded.
You should test a connection with (latest version of) Filezilla, set the connection logging to verbose and present the output in a post.
I can then have a look at the issue and where the problem originates from.
Regards....
w00t
Basic Pleskian
Due to FileZilla 3.15.0.2 right now I personally checked it, previously beforehand blocked all ports for passive mode. I can confirm that I too couldn't get the listing of files from the server. Thus I can assume that the problem isn't in ftp clients, but on the server side. =/
Similar threads
