Is a Layered Security Setup (Pi-hole in VM + SimpleWall + Portmaster) Worth the Complexity?
I’m looking to maximize the security of my Windows system by using a layered approach and would love to gather opinions and insights from the community.
My Setup:
I run Pi-hole in a VirtualBox VM configured with a host-only network on my Windows machine. This isolates Pi-hole from external access and ensures that only my computer can use it.
On my Windows host, I use SimpleWall and Portmaster to manage and monitor network connections, blocking all outbound traffic by default and allowing only specific, trusted applications.
I configure Windows to use the Pi-hole VM as its sole DNS server, so that if the VM isn’t running, DNS queries fail—effectively cutting off internet access.
My Goal:
My primary focus is on security. I want to ensure that my system is as secure as possible and that no unauthorized parties—whether hackers, malicious insiders, or even potential backdoors inserted by software developers—can access my data or intercept my network traffic.
The AI's Response (Summarized):
Advantages of the Layered Approach:
Enhanced Security & Isolation: Running Pi-hole in a VM with a host-only network isolates it from external threats, reducing the risk of unauthorized access.
Granular Control: With SimpleWall and Portmaster, I can enforce strict network rules, allowing only trusted connections while blocking everything else.
Defense-in-Depth: Even if one layer were to be compromised, the multiple layers of security work together to protect my system.
Concerns and Considerations:
Increased Complexity: Managing multiple security tools increases the setup’s complexity and requires ongoing maintenance. Misconfiguration could potentially lead to vulnerabilities.
Theoretical Risks: While these tools are open source and can be audited, there is always a theoretical risk of vulnerabilities or backdoors being introduced (intentionally or unintentionally). This layered setup aims to mitigate those risks by isolating each component.
Risk vs. Benefit for Typical Data: For many users, the default telemetry provided by large companies might be acceptable.
My Question to the Community:
Do you believe that implementing such a layered security setup is worth the added complexity and maintenance overhead? Are the security benefits (protection from unauthorized access, potential backdoors, and interception) significant enough compared to relying on the default system telemetry (which is mostly anonymized) offered by large companies? What are your experiences and opinions on using multiple security tools versus trusting the built-in systems?
Looking forward to your thoughts and experiences!
