CSF, cPHulk or both?

duimstra

• August 20, 2015 04:37

I'm currently running both CSF (lfd) and cPHulk simultaneously. 1. When CSF lfd (login failure deamon) blocks a user, I'm able to display a simple HTML message explaining why the block occured. 2. When cPHulk blocks a user, all they see is "Wrong password message", which is annoying because users don't know what they did wrong. My question: Does it even make sense to run both services? Could I just disable cPHulk? What is your recipe?

• 

  cPanelMichael

  • August 20, 2015 14:22

  Hello :) Some users do choose to disable cPHulk when using CSF/LFD to prevent brute force attacks. Both services offer protection from brute force attempts, so it's a user-preference if you want to use both of them.

  . When cPHulk blocks a user, all they see is "Wrong password message", which is annoying because users don't know what they did wrong.

  
  This is by design to help prevent attackers from determining if a username exists on a system. Thank you.

  0
• 

  duimstra

  • August 21, 2015 06:59

  Hi Michael, thanks for the explanation :) But - does cPHulk offer some level of protection CSF doesn't?

  0
• 

  cPanelMichael

  • August 28, 2015 17:25

  But - does cPHulk offer some level of protection CSF doesn't?

  
  CSF/LFD should protect against brute force attacks on no lesser level than cPHulk, but that question might be better asked on the CSF/LFD forums. You can find documentation on cPHulk that explains all of it's features at:

  0

Please sign in to leave a comment.