Topic: Forum modifications: brute force protection

I have made some modifications to the forums tonight. Basically, I have written some code to protect user accounts from brute force attacks. The new protection system works by recording the IP address of failed attempts. If a user's login attempt fails 5 times in any 24 hour period, the IP address will be blocked for the remainder of that day.

I still have a bit more work to do on the code, but it is in place and working now. If anyone has any issues with logging into or out of the forums, please let me know. smile

Last edited by corenominal (2010-11-26 13:01:06)

Re: Forum modifications: brute force protection

Well done, but forum users should not rely on this alone to protect them.  They should still ensure that they use strong passwords, and change them regularly to reduce the chance of having their account hacked.  smile

Politeness, Respect, Trust, Humility - forum etiquette I abide by!
identi.ca | My blog

Re: Forum modifications: brute force protection

^ wise words! smile

Re: Forum modifications: brute force protection

What,

I've just remembered 1234 smile

Re: Forum modifications: brute force protection

IgorP wrote:

What,

I've just remembered 1234 smile

Igor! So what!? You stole my password!! yikeslol

Re: Forum modifications: brute force protection

bobobex wrote:

Well done, but forum users should not rely on this alone to protect them.  They should still ensure that they use strong passwords, and change them regularly to reduce the chance of having their account hacked.  smile

I agree. Hacks, Cracks and Viruses usually have one main cause 95% of the time - Pebcak

http://strongpasswordgenerator.com/

Last edited by rich (2010-03-29 22:28:06)

Re: Forum modifications: brute force protection

You guys are idiots, 1234 is way too easy.

You should use a strong one, like 12password34, like I do.

I really am a nice person until you ask the police.
The first link is to a forum for a kick-ass MMORPG to be
The second is a blog for anyone with an opinion.
|The Hallow Life|DigiMantis|

Re: Forum modifications: brute force protection

** Message moderated **

Last edited by corenominal (2010-03-30 04:49:54)

Re: Forum modifications: brute force protection

By the way Philip, IP addresses ...  a bit limited. Can I interest you in
http://panopticlick.eff.org/

Re: Forum modifications: brute force protection

bobobex wrote:

Well done, but forum users should not rely on this alone to protect them.  They should still ensure that they use strong passwords, and change them regularly to reduce the chance of having their account hacked.  smile

covered wink

Re: Forum modifications: brute force protection

Chives wrote:

You guys are idiots, 1234 is way too easy.

You should use a strong one, like 12password34, like I do.


We can laugh but I actually know someone who uses password. as a password for everything. Apparently the fullstop at the end makes it secure wink

Re: Forum modifications: brute force protection

Toolz wrote:

By the way Philip, IP addresses ...  a bit limited. Can I interest you in
http://panopticlick.eff.org/

It is true, IP addresses are not ideal, but I am not sure that using the same techniques as used by the service you linked to would be any better. I could be wrong about this, but I would imagine that anyone who is serious about brute forcing an account would probably be utilising a scripted attack outside of a browser.

Re: Forum modifications: brute force protection

omns wrote:
Chives wrote:

You guys are idiots, 1234 is way too easy.

You should use a strong one, like 12password34, like I do.


We can laugh but I actually know someone who uses password. as a password for everything. Apparently the fullstop at the end makes it secure wink

lol

Re: Forum modifications: brute force protection

corenominal wrote:

... anyone who is serious about brute forcing an account would probably be utilising a scripted attack outside of a browser.

... and that tool shows how difficult it should be to mimic a browser.

Anyway, if moderators/users are using the same password on other sites, as I indicated they might in the deleted post, they can just go and brute-force it somewhere else then come here and quietly log in.

Re: Forum modifications: brute force protection

Toolz wrote:
corenominal wrote:

... anyone who is serious about brute forcing an account would probably be utilising a scripted attack outside of a browser.

... and that tool shows how difficult it should be to mimic a browser.

Anyway, if moderators/users are using the same password on other sites, as I indicated they might in the deleted post, they can just go and brute-force it somewhere else then come here and quietly log in.

^ is true.

Re: Forum modifications: brute force protection

corenominal wrote:
Toolz wrote:

By the way Philip, IP addresses ...  a bit limited. Can I interest you in
http://panopticlick.eff.org/

It is true, IP addresses are not ideal, but I am not sure that using the same techniques as used by the service you linked to would be any better. I could be wrong about this, but I would imagine that anyone who is serious about brute forcing an account would probably be utilising a scripted attack outside of a browser.

The main issue with blocking IP addresses is that you may block more than one user. Usually institutions route the internet public IP through a proxy to their intranet. Say a university, for example (I worked on one). So you may have thousands of users blocked by one failed user because they will have the same public IP. Not good.

Cumprimentos. Regards.
--
Asus EeeBoxPC 1501P and EeePC 1000H with #! Xfce Linux

Re: Forum modifications: brute force protection

And then there are other threats such as a typical windows system which has a virus which downloads a payload of trojan+keylogger. This leaves very little a forum Admin can do to protect users from themselves.

As for protecting via IP address, the traditional cracker will only use the same IP two or three times via a compromised connection or proxy. It has been said that for DOS attacks they are now using the datacenters that spam botnets have acquired to issue their own IP addresses.
But then again, the type of lame script-kiddie who attacks forums will not have the skill set of the more experienced cracker, who wouldn't even bother with websites in the first place.

On my forums, it is mandatory for a user to create a secure password (a mix of uppercase and lowercase with at least one number) or they aren't allowed to sign up.

My suggestion is a minimum of 10 letters/numbers with both uppercase and lowercase which contain no words whatsoever. Just random letters and digits. Then you can create 12 passwords like this and rotate them once a month. You get a years worth for free smile

Re: Forum modifications: brute force protection

@ richs-lxh

enforcing password security is all well and good until every website needs a diferent password, then you need to write them all down.
At college we had to have passwords with upper case, lower case numbers etc, to make matters worse we had to change passwords every month, and couldn't reuse them either, i think in the end i just went for my name and a number, not very secure.

- - - - - - - - Wiki Pages - - - - - - -
#! install guide           *autostart programs, modify the menu & keybindings
configuring Conky       *installing scripts

Re: Forum modifications: brute force protection

I know it can be a pain if you need to login to a lot of forums/sites, but then so is having to run antivirus on Windows, having antispam filters and firewalls.

It's the sign of the times. For every security measure, there is some lame-ass [insert expletive] trying to make our everyday computing experience harder each day.

Last year I had to fend off a multi-spam attack on one of my forums which left me with 10 constant login attempts every 2 minutes (at one error message per attempt, imagine a 24 hour period). The spammers had been banned and blocked but the constant login attempts were hitting the databases and filling up the forum with error logs. The IP block didn't work as they were Chinese spambots which had their own datacenter whith a never-ending supply of IP addresses.

In the end I had to add a complete IP range redirect to my htaccess file which redirected them to a US Government antispam site. This is a really messy workaround, and using the htaccess for such problems isn't generally a good idea, I wrote about it HERE. But that is what the web is coming to now. Drastic measures to fend off the attackers.

This includes having to use the password system I stated before.

Last edited by rich (2010-03-30 12:06:26)

Re: Forum modifications: brute force protection

How about a recaptcha on the login? Doesn't that make the forum a little more secure aswell?

Re: Forum modifications: brute force protection

Creating pattern based passwords are also effective, change it every month or so simply by moving the pattern up, down, left or right makes it easy enough to remember over a long period of time.

Example:

0oK9iJ8uH7yG

Followed by:

9iJ8uH7yG6tF

For instance...

My artwork at deviantART   |    My Tweet   | My upcoming web page
Nulla dies sine GIMP!
ASUS Eee PC 1000 HE | 2GB | 120GB OCZ Vertex 2 SSD | #! Statler

Re: Forum modifications: brute force protection

If you want something quick, but easy to remember, have a password like asdf;lkj - take less than 1/4 second, just the home row keys.  Of course
there are variation like using the other rows or shifting right or left your hand(s).

1234 is too easy.  But 12340987 is not and that took me less than 1/4 seconds.  IMHO, 8 characters is enough especially for forums, games, etc.
For online banking, medical stuffs, etc, use 10+ characters.

Sheng-Chieh

Re: Forum modifications: brute force protection

I'm afraid he sounded too serious...

I really am a nice person until you ask the police.
The first link is to a forum for a kick-ass MMORPG to be
The second is a blog for anyone with an opinion.
|The Hallow Life|DigiMantis|

Re: Forum modifications: brute force protection

I went to panopticlick and "tested". Apparently i have a very unique browser, so as per advice there i unchecked javascript and java in my browser preferences, confirmed that gufw and firestarter are both enabled and now my browser uniqueness seems to have increased as per this site,
"Within our dataset of several hundred thousand visitors, only one in 260,135 browsers have the same fingerprint as yours.

Currently, we estimate that your browser has a fingerprint that conveys 17.99 bits of identifying information." 
Before my 'fingerprint conveyed only 15.66 bits of identifying information'???

Last edited by mzsade (2010-04-04 08:30:32)

Re: Forum modifications: brute force protection

I guess using Iceweasel makes us all easier to identify... Best way is to use windows & internet explorer i guess.
smile
BTW Panopticlick themselves doesn't recognize you... they add you to their database everytime you run the test. First time i was one in about 600,000 browsers, now i'm one in 48,779 browsers. I'll keep pressing F5 till i feel safe. smile smile

Last edited by Tunafish (2010-04-04 09:13:10)

Compaq Presario A900 - #! Statler Alpha2 Openbox
Privacy & Security on #! - Application List