this post was submitted on 25 Jan 2026
145 points (97.4% liked)

Selfhosted

61451 readers
438 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:

Detailed Rules Post

  1. Be civil.

  2. No spam.

  3. Posts are to be related to self-hosting.

  4. Don't duplicate the full text of your blog or readme if you're providing a link.

  5. Submission headline should match the article title.

  6. No trolling.

  7. Promotion posts require active participation, with an account that is at least 30 days old. F/LOSS without a paywall has exceptions, with requirements. See the rules link for details. Tags [CBH] or [AIP] are required, see the links in Rule 8 for details.

  8. AI-related discussions and AI-involved promotional posts have additional requirements for tagging, as noted in Rule 7 and the AI & Promotional Post Expanded Rules post, and find example disclosures here.

Resources:

Any issues on the community? Report it using the report flag.

Questions? DM the mods!

founded 3 years ago
MODERATORS
 

I find the idea of self-hosting to be really appealing, but at the same time I find it to be incredibly scary. This is not because I lack the technical expertise, but because I have gotten the impression that everyone on the Internet would immediately try to hack into it to make it join their bot net. As a result, I would have to be constantly vigilant against this, yet one of the numerous assailants would only have to succeed once. Dealing with this constant threat seems like it would be frightening enough as a full-time job, but this would only be a hobby project for me.

How do the self-hosters on Lemmy avoid becoming one with the botnet?

you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[–] krashmo@lemmy.world 5 points 6 months ago (2 children)

What are you referring to when you say basic brute force protection?

[–] cecilkorik@lemmy.ca 11 points 6 months ago

fail2ban mainly, but also things like scaling login delays (some sort of option often built into the software you're running, but just as often not configured by default), or if you're feeling particularly paranoid account locking after too many failures, and in general just not using default, predictable, common usernames or weak passwords, and honestly it's even helped a bit by having slow hardware and throttled network bandwidth.

The goal is to make it so that someone can't run a script that sends 100 million login attempts per second for common or stolen usernames and passwords and your server just helpfully tries them all and obediently tells them none of those worked... until one of them does.

Not only does this encourage them to TRY sending 100 million login attempts per second because your server isn't refusing it, which is a huge waste of bandwidth and resources, it also makes it really likely that they're eventually going to guess one right.

[–] ShortN0te@lemmy.ml 3 points 6 months ago

The other answer is already good but I answer more general.

Rate limiting. Do not allow as many requests as your CPU can handle but limit authentication requests. Like a couple requests per second already goes a long way.