Penetration Testing mailing list archives
Re: Some new SSH exploit script?
From: Steve Smith <smith6050 () yahoo com>
Date: Wed, 7 Jun 2006 16:41:05 -0700 (PDT)
Thanks for these numbers Thor. I'm hearing many good ideas here and it really boils down to resources and level of effort. If you have the resources to capture and analyze the massive number of logs and the ability to do event correlation, it makes sense to leave services running on default ports. If the resources are limited, why not change the default ports and reduce the footprint of your logs and raise the fruit higher. Granted you may not have enough in the logs to fingerprint the next attack vector but if the attacker isn't knocking on your door, why bother answering? I ran similar test months ago on a web server running on port 64800 and had very few hit verses millions on the standard port 80. Steve Smith --- "Thor (Hammer of God)" <thor () hammerofgod com> wrote:
Changing the port number, is akin, to hiding thedoor, because yourafraid of the lock installed in it. It only raisesthe bar to thespecial olympics level. I believe in security in-depth, but this depth isso superficial, Ireally don't think it's worth it.No, it's akin to hiding the door in _addition_ to having strong locks on it. This subject comes up here from time to time, and it basically always comes down to someone saying "it's so trivial that it doesn't matter" and others saying "if it helps at all, even if only slightly, then it's a good thing." I number myself among the latter group- if it raises your fruit higher than the guy next to you, then go for it. Changing default listening ports immediately obviates you from standard/worm/kiddie traffic. That, in itself is a good enough reason for me. We had this discussion over on the ISA list about RDP several months back. After that thread, I hosted terminal services and SQL on 2 boxes: one on 3389/1433, the other on 53343/43343 respectively for Feb, March and part of April. There were something like 45,000 failed RDP logon attemps on 3389, and not a single logon attempt (other than from me) on 53343. The SQL numbers were almost 200,000 on 1433, and something like 10 on 43343. I was actually pretty surprised to see the 10. (I've got the actual numbers on the box itself, I might bring it up and get the actual figures if I get time). You can speculate about port-scanning worms, "intelligent" viruses, etc all you want, but they're just not being written (yet). Moving my RDP listener to 53343 prevented over 45,000 logon attempts. To me, that is not a superficial security-in-depth mechanism. There are a million different things that *could* have been done, but they just weren't. I'll continue to host RDP on an alternate port because it provides some value, albeit small, to my security in depth strategy. I also continue to find value in "source port" firewall rules where only connections to services initiated from a particular source port are allowed. Others have said that practice is also just "security through obscurity" yet I think it is a good idea, and it works for me. I use this method to help protect access to my production servers for remote RDP access - RDP listens on an alternate port, and my ISA server only allows the connection when made from a specific source port (I actually use a small range of source ports) - there has never even been a connection attempt made (other than from me.) Given actual data I have collected, I'll continue to use this method as well. t
------------------------------------------------------------------------------
This List Sponsored by: Cenzic Concerned about Web Application Security? Why not go with the #1 solution - Cenzic, the only one to win the Analyst's Choice Award from eWeek. As attacks through web applications continue to rise, you need to proactively protect your applications from hackers. Cenzic has the most comprehensive solutions to meet your application security penetration testing and vulnerability management needs. You have an option to go with a managed service (Cenzic ClickToSecure) or an enterprise software (Cenzic Hailstorm). Download FREE whitepaper on how a managed service can help you: http://www.cenzic.com/news_events/wpappsec.php And, now for a limited time we can do a FREE audit for you to confirm your results from other product. Contact us at request () cenzic com for details.
------------------------------------------------------------------------------
__________________________________________________ Do You Yahoo!? Tired of spam? Yahoo! Mail has the best spam protection around http://mail.yahoo.com ------------------------------------------------------------------------------ This List Sponsored by: Cenzic Concerned about Web Application Security? Why not go with the #1 solution - Cenzic, the only one to win the Analyst's Choice Award from eWeek. As attacks through web applications continue to rise, you need to proactively protect your applications from hackers. Cenzic has the most comprehensive solutions to meet your application security penetration testing and vulnerability management needs. You have an option to go with a managed service (Cenzic ClickToSecure) or an enterprise software (Cenzic Hailstorm). Download FREE whitepaper on how a managed service can help you: http://www.cenzic.com/news_events/wpappsec.php And, now for a limited time we can do a FREE audit for you to confirm your results from other product. Contact us at request () cenzic com for details. ------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Current thread:
- Re: Some new SSH exploit script?, (continued)
- Re: Some new SSH exploit script? Adam.Chesnutt (Jun 07)
- Re: Some new SSH exploit script? Jurriaans, Marco (Jun 05)
- RE: Some new SSH exploit script? Michael Sierchio (Jun 06)
- Re: Some new SSH exploit script? Larry Offley (Jun 06)
- Re: Some new SSH exploit script? Adam.Chesnutt (Jun 07)
- Re: Some new SSH exploit script? Robert E. Lee (Jun 08)
- Re: Some new SSH exploit script? Adam.Chesnutt (Jun 09)
- Re: Some new SSH exploit script? Larry Offley (Jun 06)
- Re: Some new SSH exploit script? silentw (Jun 07)
- Re: Some new SSH exploit script? Adam.Chesnutt (Jun 07)
- Re: Some new SSH exploit script? Thor (Hammer of God) (Jun 07)
- Re: Some new SSH exploit script? Steve Smith (Jun 08)
- Re: Some new SSH exploit script? Pete Fuggle (Jun 08)
- Re: Some new SSH exploit script? R. DuFresne (Jun 08)
- Re: Some new SSH exploit script? Paul Robertson (Jun 09)
- Re: Some new SSH exploit script? R. DuFresne (Jun 09)
- Re: Some new SSH exploit script? litch (Jun 07)
- Unix auditing tools - Windows based. Serge Vondandamo (Jun 08)
- Re: Unix auditing tools - Windows based. Sol Invictus (Jun 08)
- RE: Unix auditing tools - Windows based. Meidinger Chris (Jun 08)
- RE: Unix auditing tools - Windows based. Serge Vondandamo (Jun 08)
- Re: Unix auditing tools - Windows based. Sol Invictus (Jun 09)