Replies: 1 comment
-
It looks like you're trying to use single-port action type for multiple ports. fail2ban/config/action.d/iptables.conf Lines 9 to 13 in ff3eca1 Anyway, the correct setting would be:
However, I don't understand why you don't want use nftables action (which shall be default for debian now): fail2ban/config/paths-debian.conf Lines 10 to 13 in ff3eca1 Especially because I see iptables v1.8.9 (nf_tables) , that means that your native net-filter is nftables and iptables emulate it (it used as a mockup layer).
|
Beta Was this translation helpful? Give feedback.
0 replies
Sign up for free
to join this conversation on GitHub.
Already have an account?
Sign in to comment
Uh oh!
There was an error while loading. Please reload this page.
Uh oh!
There was an error while loading. Please reload this page.
-
For Debian 12 I wanted to try switching from regular iptables to iptables-ipset or iptables-ipset-proto6, but I do seem to be getting some errors and was wondering, for fail2ban 1.0.2-2, if it is supposed to work "out of the box" before I go looking at things. I'm wondering if I should change all the ports to the actual numbers rather than the strings (e.g. http, https). Later versions of iptables are more strict.
The types of errors I get are related to invalid port/service `http,https' specified, when setting up the command.
I also get errors like:
Beta Was this translation helpful? Give feedback.
All reactions