On 6/5/2019 20:07, @lbutlr wrote:
On 6 May 2019, at 06:33, Lefteris Tsintjelis <le...@spes.gr> wrote:
On 6/5/2019 15:14, @lbutlr wrote:
On 6 May 2019, at 02:10, Lefteris Tsintjelis <le...@spes.gr> wrote:
Fail2ban and equivalent log parsers are just too resource hungry,
No they aren't.
Yes they are.
Not on my super powerful 7 year old i5 mail server with a whole 4GB of RAM that
I bought for under $300. I'm sure there are people running mail servers on
older and lousier hardware, but I'd guess it's not many.
messy and more time consuming to maintain
Sounds like you are parting some false information others fed you. There is
nothing to maintain, and they run silently and take no time at all.
Sounds like you never used them but if you say so must be like that 😉
I have used both and currently use sshguard. I've never seen either show up on
htop when sorting by CPU time.
Currently I am using sshguard
51842 root 52 0 6464 1544 S 0.0 0.0 0:00.00 sh
/usr/local/sbin/sshguard -b /usr/local/etc/sshguard.blacklist -b
120:/var/db/sshguard/blacklist.db -i /var/run/sshguard
0.0 CPU, 0.0 Mem, 00:00:00 Time
Perfect for personal usage and home/small office solution! You should
stick with it. Try the same with any log parsers on busy mail servers
and let me know how it works out.
