Comment on What's the real danger of opening ports?
sfjvvssss@lemmy.world 3 weeks agoA WAF won’t magically solve your problems and free you from your attack surface. Your public facing services should be treated, configured and maintained as such. I am not sure if you include a WAF in the stuff that won’t stop exploitation of vulns, but it definitely belongs there. Yes, it can decrease volume and make exploitation a bit harder but that’s it usually. Also don’t just include proprietary third party stuff and hope it solves your problems.
blargh513@sh.itjust.works 3 weeks ago
It isn’t a magic solution, no, but you have a lot more control than crummy layer 3 firewall rules and endless lists.
The big players have far more data about what bad looks like. Either we can play whack a mole with outdated tools and techniques or get smart and learn to use what is available.
Self hosting doesn’t mean we go backward in terms of the sophistication and difficulty, it means embracing modern solutions.
In the dinosaur days, we had primitive tools, but so did the attackers. We cannot hope to self host with any measure of security if we bring piss to a shitfight.
sfjvvssss@lemmy.world 3 weeks ago
I tested WAFs in the past, also ones from the big players and while they might block some cheesy stuff on the application layer, as long as they are not heavily tailored towards your application, they stop bein effective against most manual stuff.
Everything lower than application layer ist not a WAF btw, so I am not sure if you mean WAF or some Firewallish stuff.
Just stick to best practices and expose only what you really need to expose. When putting third parties in front of your stuff this als has data protection implications. If using it makes you feel better okay but it should not feel you more secure if you expose vulnerable stuff.