Comment on What's the security situation when opening a jellyfin server up for casting?

• teawrecks@sopuli.xyz ⁨6⁩ ⁨days⁩ ago

  The resources required to port scan every port on every IP is generally not worth it. AFAIK they tend to stick to lower ports or popular ports. Unless they’re intentionally targeting a specific IP or IP range, they’re just looking for low hanging fruit.

  source

  • diegantobass@lemmy.world ⁨6⁩ ⁨days⁩ ago

    Low hanging fruits are, in my personal case, pictures of my cats and public domain cultural artefacts.

    Industrializing hacking of random servers sounds like a shitty idea at the end of the day…

    source

    • teawrecks@sopuli.xyz ⁨5⁩ ⁨days⁩ ago

      The ability to generate a bunch of traffic that looks like it’s coming from legit, every-day residential IPs is invaluable to disinformation campaigns. If they can get persistence in your network, they can toss it into a bot net which they’ll sell access to on the dark web.

      A sucker opens insecure services to the open internet every day, that’s free real estate to bot farms. Only when the probability of finding them is low enough is it not worth the energy/network costs. I think hosting on non-standard ports is probably correlated with lowering that probability below some threshold where it becomes not worth it…don’t quote me, though.

      At the end of the day, the rule is not to depend on security by obscurity, but that doesn’t mean never use it.

      source

      • diegantobass@lemmy.world ⁨5⁩ ⁨days⁩ ago

        This whole thread (that I shamelessly hijacked) is very informative and allowed me to understand that cybersecurity is in practice a mixture of concrete nerdy log books and vague feeling of being under a threshold of worthiness.

        I woke up this morning and there was a faint noise coming from the server: immediately thought “ok that’s it, it’s pawned and become a node in a vast grid of malicious bots”…it was a cron verification of drives

        source

        • -> View More Comments