Hi Phil, I presume you mean fail2ban here…if so, I must respectfully dissent… :=)
I agree that early on, the docs were horrible (to say the least) but more recently, I think the dev has done a fair job making f2b easier to implement and use. Now granted, I do only use it for checking SASL and making the approbate blocks but I was also able to extend f2b to add my own startup routine so, for example, my permaban list is setup when f2b is restarted. Yes I know they do have a persistent db of sorts but I still prefer having my own permaban list... > On Aug 26, 2020, at 1:48 PM, Phil Stracchino <ph...@caerllewys.net> wrote: > > On 2020-08-26 16:03, Viktor Dukhovni wrote: >> On Wed, Aug 26, 2020 at 09:59:34PM +0200, Jaroslaw Rafa wrote: >> >>> Dnia 27.08.2020 o godz. 07:53:05 Peter pisze: >>> >>> Or just use fail2ban. >> >> Yes, but the whole point is that fail2ban is rather a hack, and NetBSD >> actually has a decent framework for integrating application events >> directly with the system firewall. > > Not to mention that it has one of the more opaque and unclearly > documented configuration schemes I've ever seen ... > > This is why I keep thinking about writing my own single-purpose tool > that does NOTHING BUT monitor mail.log for abusive IPs and remotely tell > the firewall to banhammer them. > > > -- > Phil Stracchino > Babylon Communications > ph...@caerllewys.net > p...@co.ordinate.org > Landline: +1.603.293.8485 > Mobile: +1.603.998.6958
