Re: Safe bruteforce rule for mobile-friendly website

So is there any point in having bruteforce for httpd? Especially now that mobile is the future? Mikkel 2013/2/7 Mikkel Bang facebookman...@gmail.com I forget if mobiles do more prefetching on dns and/or tcp on mobiles but perhaps that's worth considering as a culprit. My God Kevin

Re: Safe bruteforce rule for mobile-friendly website

to a dedicated mobile site later on though. Thank you! Mikkel 2013/2/6 Peter N. M. Hansteen pe...@bsdly.net Mikkel Bang facebookman...@gmail.com writes: Turns out this (http://home.nuug.no/~peter/pf/en/long-firewall.html) bans any IP connecting from mobile devices: Well, that document says

Re: Safe bruteforce rule for mobile-friendly website

I forget if mobiles do more prefetching on dns and/or tcp on mobiles but perhaps that's worth considering as a culprit. My God Kevin, that's gotta be it! Does the page have more than 15 links? Yep, like 16-17 or so :) Mikkel 2013/2/7 Kevin Chadwick ma1l1i...@yahoo.co.uk I had to

Safe bruteforce rule for mobile-friendly website

Hi, Turns out this (http://home.nuug.no/~peter/pf/en/long-firewall.html) bans any IP connecting from mobile devices: pass in on $ext_if inet proto tcp from any to any port 80 keep state (max-src-conn 100, max-src-conn-rate 15/5, overload bruteforce flush global) Works fine when connecting from

Re: 5.2 PRE-ORDERS

Can't you just put up a Spree shop or something? I'd like some cups and stickers too, and maybe a teddybear version of that fish for my kid. Some OpenBSD underwear for the wife would be great too. Thanks. Mikkel 2012/10/7 OpenBSD Europe m...@openbsdeurope.com: Excellent - if you need anything

Re: More sensible and consistent rc.conf.local

, but it's 2012 - it's time to make some power moves. If OpenBSD was on Git / at GitHub, youngins like me would have patched this baby up a long time ago. Mikkel 2012/8/29 Stuart Henderson s...@spacehopper.org: On 2012-08-25, Mikkel Bang facebookman...@gmail.com wrote: Hello! Is there a way

More sensible and consistent rc.conf.local

Hello! Is there a way to make my rc.conf.local more sensible and consistent, i.e. not pf=YES sshd= named_flags= but rather pf=YES sshd=YES named=YES? Thanks! Mikkel

OpenBSD init script (rails+nginx+unicorn)

Can/should this init script be rewritten/simplified for OpenBSD? https://gist.github.com/3447050 (an application-specific init scripthttp://blog.kiskolabs.com/post/722322392/unicorn-init-scriptsfor a rails+nginx+unicorn http://sirupsen.com/setting-up-unicorn-with-nginx/ setup) I like how

Re: OpenBSD init script (rails+nginx+unicorn)

For what it's worth, here she is: https://gist.github.com/3447050 the Linux version sure is jealous now :-) Mikkel 2012/8/24 Mikkel Bang facebookman...@gmail.com Can/should this init script be rewritten/simplified for OpenBSD? https://gist.github.com/3447050 (an application-specific init

Re: The ultimate OpenBSD email server

2012/8/15 Peter N. M. Hansteen pe...@bsdly.net I beg to differ. spamd(8) in any configuration is a lot more lightweight than content filtering. You most likely will need content filtering in addition to greylisting+greytrapping, but stopping them earlier is a real plus. See eg

NSD vs BIND

Hello! For authoritative nameservers - which do you guys prefer, NSD or BIND? I've been using BIND all these years, but after Googling around, NSD seems extremely attractive. Plus it follows BIND's zonefile format so I don't really have to redesign my configs, how about that? Mikkel

The ultimate OpenBSD email server

I'm trying to configure the ultimate email server for this webapp that needs to send and receive / forward emails to and from thousands of users. But with so many people recommending so many different tools, it gets hard to come to a conclusion. Looks like I'm finally arriving at this though: