• 1 Post
  • 161 Comments
Joined 3 years ago
cake
Cake day: April 30th, 2024

help-circle



  • I’m a little paranoid, so this is my security set up.

    SSH, blocked at firewall level, only allowing specific local IP to access port 22. Also authentication is done by key, with password disabled.

    Most services are local only and I access them through wireguard VPN when I’m outside my home.

    For services that need a domain name and be public facing, I use a reverse proxy, with the following protections:

    • Very restrictive geoIP block, only my country can access.
    • Restrictive rate limiting.
    • Crodwsec, with community lists, a pluging for open lists, community rules and my own very restrictive set of rules for banning attackers. (For instance as soon as the requested path contains “.env” that’s an instant ban, no second chances).
    • Monitoring through grafana.
    • Some complex services that need a valid tls handshake but I only want to use them myself have a setup when they are technically open to the net, to get let’s encrypt, but the server rejects every IP request but mine.

    Recently I also reduced some noise, surface attack, deleting the A register from my second level domain and using an obscured target for the CNAME records. I also want to delete the www subdomain as it gets a lot of uneeded noise.







  • I glimpsed though the article and I didn’t see it.

    It said it used frequency of words for determination of AI usage.

    Did it consider that AI is mostly trained of those papers and thus AI detection methods could not be as accurate as thought by the ones making this analysis?

    Did the just considered general “generic AI repeated words” or did the actually used a frequency analysis of the actual fingerprint left by the LMM that companies put there for forensic analysis (and that I don’t ever know of the companies are publishing the signatures they use).






  • It’s fun. It has a few rough edges I would love to be fixed.

    The format would make you think that’s perfect for phone browsing, it’s just text so ot should adapt easy to small screens. Well, I’ve found too many capsules that write newlines for formsting text based on a traditional desktop expected screen size. I think there should be more geminiettiquete about not making the format of the page expect any aspect ratio or size.

    On the web we have css to fix that and do fancy formats that can adapt everywhere. In gemini there’s no css so publishers should avoid trying to aim for a hardcoded expected aspect. As that could break the viewing experience for many users.

    Other that that it’s quite fun to read some of the little pages out there.