Hi all, I am behind CGNAT, but my ISP router is allocating real IPv6 addresses to my devices that can be exposed. I have a Proxmox and I have installed Wireguard on an LXC container and configured it to listen to the IPv6 address.

I was wondering if I need to do something else to protect my Wireguard installation? I have exposed only the default UDP port to the outside and port scanners are not working on UDP ports as far as I know. Shall I do something else to protect my installation or the attack vector is already minimal and doesn’t require further hardening? What’s your opinion?

  • WaterWaiver@aussie.zone
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    37
    ·
    edit-2
    2 months ago

    As far as I understand, wireguard is designed so that it can’t be portscanned. Replies are never sent to packets unless they pass full auth.

    This is both a blessing and a curse. It unfortunately means that if you misconfigure a key then your packets get silently ignored by the other party, no error messages or the likes, it’s as if the other party doesn’t exist.

    EDIT: Yep, as per https://www.wireguard.com/protocol/

    In fact, the server does not even respond at all to an unauthorized client; it is silent and invisible.

    • non_burglar@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      9
      ·
      2 months ago

      It unfortunately means that if you misconfigure a key then your packets get silently ignored by the other party

      After ipsec troubleshooting phase 1 & 2, WG is still a blessing.

  • vividspecter@aussie.zone
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    5
    ·
    2 months ago

    You could also secure what peers inside the tunnel can access, particularly if you plan to give other people access. I.e. only allow only port 443 on a given server using a reverse proxy. It’s not a major threat either way but it would reduce the amount of access if someone gets into your phone/laptop etc.

  • Oha@lemmy.ohaa.xyz
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    1
    ·
    2 months ago

    You are pretty much as safe as it gets as long as you update that container. Ip/Port scanning basically isnt a thing in ipv6 land as youd have to scan the entire /64 which amounts to 18,446,744,073,709,551,616 addresses.

    • Archer@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      1
      ·
      2 months ago

      Not entirely true! There are ways to scan IPv6 space efficiently without brute force that are in RFCs

  • carrylex@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    1
    ·
    23 days ago

    I did basically the same a few months ago, works really well in combination with DDNS.

    Just make sure to keep WireGuard up to date from time to time to get rid of any potential vulnerabilities :)