Re: fail2ban vs. logrotate
- From: Tim <ignored_mailbox@xxxxxxxxxxxx>
- Date: Wed, 26 Oct 2011 08:24:36 +1030
On Tue, 2011-10-25 at 16:12 -0400, Mike Wohlgemuth wrote:
I don't see any way to get fail2ban to reopen the log file without
also forgetting the current ban list.
As I recall, it's supposed to make temporary bans. So does it really
need to keep a ban list forever? You'd be banning things that gave up
long ago. And things that keep on hammering away would auto-ban
themselves quickly enough, again, anyway.
--
[tim@localhost ~]$ uname -r
2.6.27.25-78.2.56.fc9.i686
Don't send private replies to my address, the mailbox is ignored. I
read messages from the public lists.
--
users mailing list
users@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
To unsubscribe or change subscription options:
https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/users
Guidelines: http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Mailing_list_guidelines
- References:
- fail2ban vs. logrotate
- From: Mike Wohlgemuth
- Re: fail2ban vs. logrotate
- From: Mikkel L. Ellertson
- Re: fail2ban vs. logrotate
- From: Andre Speelmans
- Re: fail2ban vs. logrotate
- From: Mikkel L. Ellertson
- Re: fail2ban vs. logrotate
- From: Andre Speelmans
- Re: fail2ban vs. logrotate
- From: Mikkel L. Ellertson
- Re: fail2ban vs. logrotate
- From: Mike Wohlgemuth
- fail2ban vs. logrotate
- Prev by Date: F15 - Apache and PHP
- Next by Date: Re: F15 - Apache and PHP
- Previous by thread: Re: fail2ban vs. logrotate
- Next by thread: Re: fail2ban vs. logrotate
- Index(es):