Server Fault is a question and answer site for system and network administrators. It's 100% free, no registration required.

Sign up
Here's how it works:
  1. Anybody can ask a question
  2. Anybody can answer
  3. The best answers are voted up and rise to the top

Last years i use perfect software denyhosts for analyze logs and deny access if some ip address have 3 or more unsuccess logins.

I like that, but problem is - too much CPU/memory consuption for my weak computers.

May be some software without interpetator will be more good.

Can you suggest?

share|improve this question

closed as not constructive by Michael Hampton, rnxrx, Magellan, Ward, mdpc Oct 11 '12 at 20:30

As it currently stands, this question is not a good fit for our Q&A format. We expect answers to be supported by facts, references, or expertise, but this question will likely solicit debate, arguments, polling, or extended discussion. If you feel that this question can be improved and possibly reopened, visit the help center for guidance.If this question can be reworded to fit the rules in the help center, please edit the question.

If denyhosts is using too much CPU/RAM, you really need better servers... – ceejayoz Jan 5 '12 at 20:59
well, yes in absolute values its not so much. But last time some my computers with secondary tasks have big LoadAverage and eat all memory. I just wonder, what if exist some software C/perl software with 1M used memory, it will be cool. For me task parse log and write line into hosts.deny looks trivial, and i not sure that entire python needed in memory. Also i like unification, i use puppet for all my servers and want universal solutions for all comps include weak. – Korjavin Ivan Jan 5 '12 at 21:19
up vote 0 down vote accepted

If you are worried about load on your servers, then it certainly seems like it should be possible to setup syslog to send your logs off to some other system in the path. I can't give you the exact details, but it certainly seems like it should be possible to have all your logs gather to a central up-stream host which will perform any required intrusion prevent steps.

You can also setup iptables on the box to rate limit the number of connections. This in addition or in place of denyhosts/fail2ban should cut down on a lot on what those apps need to actually respond to.

See: Hundreds of failed ssh logins

share|improve this answer
Thanks. Idea have separate server for parse log - nice. – Korjavin Ivan Jan 6 '12 at 4:11

Try looking at fail2ban. and/or... rotate your logs so they don't get too big to analyze.

share|improve this answer
fail2ban the same python. I am tryed rotate log by size - 100K. And looks like size not mattered. – Korjavin Ivan Jan 5 '12 at 21:14

if you're running OpenBSD (or have a firewall somewhere in front of the machine in question), you could use pf(4) (or the equivalent for other firewall tools, e.g. iptables/ipchains) to block access to a given IP address for an arbitrary amount of time after an arbitrary number of failed login attempts.

actually, if CPU/RAM usage of denyhosts is causing you issues, you may want to switch to OpenBSD anyway for an OS that runs well on older hardware out of the box. see

share|improve this answer
I use freebsd and debian boxes, and know nothing about openbsd. Problem with python is - some java apps on my comps like eat all memory, and permanent swap makes me mad. – Korjavin Ivan Jan 5 '12 at 21:21
iptables/ipchains will have no way to identify a "failed" login. It can limit connection attempts... but it has no way to identify the contents of a packet. – TheCompWiz Jan 5 '12 at 21:23
pf(4) can in fact identify a failed login (via ssh anyway; if we're talking about logins to a web service or authentication via e.g. htpasswd, that's a different story). Other firewalling software may not be so comprehensive. :) – darkuncle Jan 5 '12 at 21:27
how much CPU/RAM is your python denyhosts process using, anyway? and for log rotation, were you using the standard log rotation facility (in FreeBSD, it's /etc/newsyslog.conf, or at least it was a few years ago)? finally: pf(4) has been part of FreeBSD's base install since 2004. see – darkuncle Jan 5 '12 at 21:30

Not the answer you're looking for? Browse other questions tagged or ask your own question.