I got into the self-hosting scene this year when I wanted to start up my own website run on old recycled thinkpad. A lot of time was spent learning about ufw, reverse proxies, header security hardening, fail2ban.

Despite all that I still had a problem with bots knocking on my ports spamming my logs. I tried some hackery getting fail2ban to read caddy logs but that didnt work for me. I nearly considered giving up and going with cloudflare like half the internet does. But my stubbornness for open source self hosting and the recent cloudflare outages this year have encouraged trying alternatives.

Coinciding with that has been an increase in exposure to seeing this thing in the places I frequent like codeberg. This is Anubis, a proxy type firewall that forces the browser client to do a proof-of-work security check and some other nice clever things to stop bots from knocking. I got interested and started thinking about beefing up security.

I’m here to tell you to try it if you have a public facing site and want to break away from cloudflare It was VERY easy to install and configure with caddyfile on a debian distro with systemctl. In an hour its filtered multiple bots and so far it seems the knocks have slowed down.

https://anubis.techaro.lol/

My botspam woes have seemingly been seriously mitigated if not completely eradicated. I’m very happy with tonights little security upgrade project that took no more than an hour of my time to install and read through documentation. Current chain is caddy reverse proxy -> points to Anubis -> points to services

Good place to start for install is here

https://anubis.techaro.lol/docs/admin/native-install/

  • sudo@programming.dev
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    5
    ·
    1 hour ago

    I’ve repeatedly stated this before: Proof of Work bot-management is only Proof of Javascript bot-management. It is nothing to a headless browser to by-pass. Proof of JavaScript does work and will stop the vast majority of bot traffic. That’s how Anubis actually works. You don’t need to punish actual users by abusing their CPU. POW is a far higher cost on your actual users than the bots.

    Last I checked Anubis has an JavaScript-less strategy called “Meta Refresh”. It first serves you a blank HTML page with a <meta> tag instructing the browser to refresh and load the real page. I highly advise using the Meta Refresh strategy. It should be the default.

    I’m glad someone is finally making an open source and self hostable bot management solution. And I don’t give a shit about the cat-girls, nor should you. But Techaro admitted they had little idea what they were doing when they started and went for the “nuclear option”. Fuck Proof of Work. It was a Dead On Arrival idea decades ago. Techaro should strip it from Anubis.

    I haven’t caught up with what’s new with Anubis, but if they want to get stricter bot-management, they should check for actual graphics acceleration.

    • SmokeyDope@piefed.socialOP
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      1
      ·
      edit-2
      1 hour ago

      Something that hasn’t been mentioned much in discussions about Anubis is that it has a graded tier system of how sketchy a client is and changing the kind of challenge based on a a weighted priority system.

      The default bot policies it comes with has it so squeaky clean regular clients are passed through, then only slightly weighted clients/IPs get the metarefresh, then its when you get to moderate-suspicion level that JavaScript Proof of Work kicks. The bot policy and weight triggers for these levels, challenge action, and duration of clients validity are all configurable.

      It seems to me that the sites who heavy hand the proof of work for every client with validity that only last every 5 minutes are the ones who are giving Anubis a bad wrap. The default bot policy settings Anubis comes with dont trigger PoW on the regular Firefox android clients ive tried including hardened ironfox. meanwhile other sites show the finger wag every connection no matter what.

      Its understandable why some choose strict policies but they give the impression this is the only way it should be done which Is overkill. I’m glad theres config options to mitigate impact normal user experience.

  • non_burglar@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    83
    ·
    4 hours ago

    Anubis is an elegant solution to the ai bot scraper issue, I just wish the solution to everything wasn’t just spending compute everywhere. In a world where we need to rethink our energy consumption and generation, even on clients, this is a stupid use of computing power.

    • Leon@pawb.social
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      54
      arrow-down
      3
      ·
      edit-2
      4 hours ago

      It also doesn’t function without JavaScript. If you’re security or privacy conscious chances are not zero that you have JS disabled, in which case this presents a roadblock.

      On the flip side of things, if you are a creator and you’d prefer to not make use of JS (there’s dozens of us) then forcing people to go through a JS “security check” feels kind of shit. The alternative is to just take the hammering, and that feels just as bad.

      No hate on Anubis. Quite the opposite, really. It just sucks that we need it.

      • SmokeyDope@piefed.socialOP
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        19
        ·
        edit-2
        4 hours ago

        Theres a compute option that doesnt require javascript. The responsibility lays on site owners to properly configure IMO, though you can make the argument its not default I guess.

        https://anubis.techaro.lol/docs/admin/configuration/challenges/metarefresh

        From docs on Meta Refresh Method

        Meta Refresh (No JavaScript)

        The metarefresh challenge sends a browser a much simpler challenge that makes it refresh the page after a set period of time. This enables clients to pass challenges without executing JavaScript.

        To use it in your Anubis configuration:

        # Generic catchall rule
        - name: generic-browser
          user_agent_regex: >-
            Mozilla|Opera
          action: CHALLENGE
          challenge:
            difficulty: 1 # Number of seconds to wait before refreshing the page
            algorithm: metarefresh # Specify a non-JS challenge method
        

        This is not enabled by default while this method is tested and its false positive rate is ascertained. Many modern scrapers use headless Google Chrome, so this will have a much higher false positive rate.

      • cecilkorik@piefed.ca
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        3
        ·
        3 hours ago

        if you are a creator and you’d prefer to not make use of JS (there’s dozens of us) then forcing people to go through a JS “security check” feels kind of shit. The alternative is to just take the hammering, and that feels just as bad.

        I’m with you here. I come from an older time on the Internet. I’m not much of a creator, but I do have websites, and unlike many self-hosters I think, in the spirit of the internet, they should be open to the public as a matter of principle, not cowering away for my own private use behind some encrypted VPN. I want it to be shared. Sometimes that means taking a hammering. It’s fine. It’s nothing that’s going to end the world if it goes down or goes away, and I try not to make a habit of being so irritating that anyone would have much legitimate reason to target me.

        I don’t like any of these sort of protections that put the burden onto legitimate users. I get that’s the reality we live in, but I reject that reality, and substitute my own. I understand that some people need to be able to block that sort of traffic to be able to limit and justify the very real costs of providing services for free on the Internet and Anubis does its job for that. But I’m not one of those people. It has yet to cost me a cent above what I have already decided to pay, and until it does, I have the freedom to adhere to my principles on this.

        To paraphrase another great movie: Why should any legitimate user be inconvenienced when the bots are the ones who suck. I refuse to punish the wrong party.

      • Nate Cox@programming.dev
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        15
        arrow-down
        14
        ·
        4 hours ago

        I feel comfortable hating on Anubis for this. The compute cost per validation is vanishingly small to someone with the existing budget to run a cloud scraping farm, it’s just another cost of doing business.

        The cost to actual users though, particularly to lower income segments who may not have compute power to spare, is annoyingly large. There are plenty of complaints out there about Anubis being painfully slow on old or underpowered devices.

        Some of us do actually prefer to use the internet minus JS, too.

        Plus the minor irritation of having anime catgirls suddenly be a part of my daily browsing.

    • cadekat@pawb.social
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      7
      arrow-down
      1
      ·
      4 hours ago

      Scarcity is what powers this type of challenge: you have to prove you spent a certain amount of electricity in exchange for access to the site, and because electricity isn’t free, this imposes a dollar cost on bots.

      You could skip the detour through hashes/electricity and do something with a proof-of-stake cryptocurrency, and just pay for access. The site owner actually gets compensated instead of burning dead dinosaurs.

      Obviously there are practical roadblocks to this today that a JavaScript proof-of-work challenge doesn’t face, but longer term…

      • Nate Cox@programming.dev
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        7
        arrow-down
        3
        ·
        3 hours ago

        The cost here only really impacts regular users, too. The type of users you actually want to block have budgets which easily allow for the compute needed anyways.

        • chicken@lemmy.dbzer0.com
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          5
          ·
          2 hours ago

          I think maybe they wouldn’t if they are trying to scale their operations to scanning through millions of sites and your site is just one of them

          • cadekat@pawb.social
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            3
            ·
            1 hour ago

            Yeah, exactly. A regular user isn’t going to notice an extra few cents on their electricity bill (boiling water costs more), but a data centre certainly will when you scale up.

  • Arghblarg@lemmy.ca
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    4
    ·
    edit-2
    2 hours ago

    I have a script that watches apache or caddy logs for poison link hits and a set of bot user agents, adding IPs to an ipset blacklist, blocking with iptables. I should polish it up for others to try. My list of unique IPs is well over 10k in just a few days.

    git repos seem to be real bait for these damn AI scrapers.

    • merc@sh.itjust.works
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      1
      ·
      13 minutes ago

      The front page of the web site is excellent. It describes what it does, and it does its feature set in quick, simple terms.

      I can’t tell you how many times I’ve gone to a website for some open-source software and had no idea what it was or how it was trying to do it. They often dive deep into the 300 different ways of installing it, tell you what the current version is and what features it has over the last version, but often they just assume you know the basics.

  • rhabarba@feddit.org
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    2
    ·
    2 hours ago

    I use it with OpenBSD’s relayd and I find it amazing how little maintenance it needs.

    • Cyberflunk@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      6
      arrow-down
      4
      ·
      3 hours ago

      thank you! this needed said.

      • This post is a bit critical of a small well-intentioned project, so I felt obliged to email the maintainer to discuss it before posting it online. I didn’t hear back.

      i used to watch the dev on mastodon, they seemed pretty radicalized on killing AI, and anyone who uses it (kidding!!) i’m not even surprised you didn’t hear back

      great take on the software, and as far as i can tell, playwright still works/completes the unit of work. at scale anubis still seems to work if you have popular content, but does hasnt stopped me using claude code + virtual browsers

      im not actively testing it though. im probably very wrong about a few things, but i know anubis isn’t hindering my personal scraping, it does fuck up perplexity and chatgpt bots, which is fun to see.

      good luck Blue team!

  • perishthethought@piefed.social
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    7
    ·
    4 hours ago

    I don’t really understand what I am seeing here, so I have to ask – are these Security issues a concern?

    https://github.com/TecharoHQ/anubis/security

    I have a server running a few tiny web sites, so I am considering this, but I’m always concerned about the possibility that adding more things to it could make it less secure, versus more. Thanks for any thoughts.

    • lime!@feddit.nu
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      12
      ·
      4 hours ago

      all of the issues listed are closed so any recent version is fine.

      also, you probably don’t need to deploy this unless you have a problem with bots.

    • SmokeyDope@piefed.socialOP
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      3
      ·
      4 hours ago

      Security issues are always a concern the question is how much. Looking at it they seem to at most be ways to circumvent the Anubis redirect system to get to your page using very specific exploits. These are marked as m low to moderate priority and I do not see anything that implies like system level access which is the big concern. Obviously do what you feel is best but IMO its not worth sweating about. Nice thing about open source projects is that anyone can look through and fix, if this gets more popular you can expect bug bounties and professional pen testing submissions.

  • mrbn@lemmy.ca
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    7
    ·
    4 hours ago

    When I visit sites on my cellphone, Anubis often doesn’t let me through.

    • cmnybo@discuss.tchncs.de
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      6
      ·
      4 hours ago

      I’ve never had any issues on my phone using Fennec or Firefox. I don’t have many addons installed apart from uBlock Origin. I wouldn’t be surprised if some privacy addons cause issues with Anubis though.

      • mrbn@lemmy.ca
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        1
        ·
        3 hours ago

        Yeah, my setup is almost like yours; I’m also on Firefox with unlock and the only difference is that I’m also using Privacy Badger

    • SmokeyDope@piefed.socialOP
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      21
      ·
      5 hours ago

      You know the thing is that they know the character is a problem/annoyance, thats how they grease the wheel on selling subscription access to a commecial version with different branding.

      https://anubis.techaro.lol/docs/admin/botstopper/

      pricing from site

      Commercial support and an unbranded version

      If you want to use Anubis but organizational policies prevent you from using the branding that the open source project ships, we offer a commercial version of Anubis named BotStopper. BotStopper builds off of the open source core of Anubis and offers organizations more control over the branding, including but not limited to:

      • Custom images for different states of the challenge process (in process, success, failure)
      • Custom CSS and fonts
      • Custom titles for the challenge and error pages
      • “Anubis” replaced with “BotStopper” across the UI
      • A private bug tracker for issues

      In the near future this will expand to:

      • A private challenge implementation that does advanced fingerprinting to check if the client is a genuine browser or not
      • Advanced fingerprinting via Thoth-based advanced checks

      In order to sign up for BotStopper, please do one of the following:

      • Sign up on GitHub Sponsors at the $50 per month tier or higher
      • Email sales@techaro.lol with your requirements for invoicing, please note that custom invoicing will cost more than using GitHub Sponsors for understandable overhead reasons

      I have to respect the play tbh its clever. Absolutely the kind of greasy shit play that Julian from the trailer park boys would do if he were an open source developer.

      • webghost0101@sopuli.xyz
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        22
        ·
        4 hours ago

        I wish more projects did stuff like this.

        It just feels silly and unprofessional while being seriously useful. Exactly my flavour of software, makes the web feel less corporate.

      • Nate Cox@programming.dev
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        2
        arrow-down
        3
        ·
        4 hours ago

        I can’t access the page to validate this because I don’t allow JS; isn’t that gated behind a paywall?

        • M.int@lemmy.zip
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          2
          ·
          3 hours ago

          You can just fork it and replace the image.

          The authors talks about it here on their blog a bit more.

        • CoyoteFacts@piefed.ca
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          2
          arrow-down
          2
          ·
          4 hours ago

          It looks like it might be; I just know someone that has a site using it and they use a different mascot, so I thought it would have been trivial. I kind of wonder why it wouldn’t be possible to just docker bind mount a couple images into the right path, but I’m guessing maybe they obfuscate/archive the file they’re reading from or something?

          • Axolotl@feddit.it
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            2
            ·
            3 hours ago

            It’s actually possible, also, it’s open source so nothing stop you from making your fork with your own images and build it

  • Fizz@lemmy.nz
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    2
    arrow-down
    7
    ·
    4 hours ago

    Its a fun little project and I like the little character but it doesnt actually do anything at this point.