Sergey G. Brester
Sergey G. Brester
> Quite unexpected I must say. You're right, that's why I want to "fix" it.
> Currently I have to restart the service in order to pull new bans from the dbfile onto each instance. Why? fail2ban sql-database is available to read for multiple readers...
I guess since the filter doesn't really need to match that values at all, we can change it to `\S+` like here: ```diff - ... -1/-1/-1/-1/\+*\d* 401 - ... (?:\d+|-1)/-1/-1/-1/\+?\d+...
> This browser behavior can result in 401 responses from the server. This is "normal" situation and a real count of such 401st-requests is depending on client/server behavior, e. g....
No idea where it really is and whether it affects all versions (of arch/exim). @felixonmars, @fail2ban/maintainers: 1. is it always the case there? 2. should this PR better target a...
Thx! Thus I'll rebase it to 0.10th.
Stupid question: you have surely reloaded/restarted fail2ban after adding second action to the jail? Because it is really surprising - I don't know such issue in 0.10th version (and don't...
> fail2ban-client get sshd actions The jail sshd has the following actions: iptables-multiport Hmm... This said that only one action (run-time values) is specified for the jail. How you do...
> Have confirmed that it seems to be a bug with fail2ban-client reload So you can reproduce it? Must still try with newest version... but I could swear we have...
Don't worry, you don't have changed the code, so this are just sporadic (run-time related) coverage decreases.