Full Disclosure mailing list archives
Re: OpenSSH is a good choice?
From: Ron DuFresne <dufresne () winternet com>
Date: Thu, 23 Dec 2004 00:43:31 -0600 (CST)
On Wed, 22 Dec 2004, Willem Koenings wrote:
On Wed, 22 Dec 2004 02:40:25 -0600 (CST), Ron DuFresne <dufresne () winternet com> wrote:I'd disagree in that the tools are getting to be well enough defined that we are all targets. Best game is to restrict who has access to the ports being served whenever possible, openssh has a history that makes this a good service to limit this way. Little need to hide what's not openly allowed to all.take a recent phpBB worm Santy for an example. worm seaches automatically targets via google - it searches viewtopic.php. if, for an example, you change that file name to something else (and also all the referrings inside the phpBB so that everything still works), then Santy does not find you phpBB as a target. this is only an illustration to my point.
My thoughts on this have centered on the point that there are too many decent scanning and banner grabbing tools out there to make botuse port assingments off the default any much good at obscuring the service. We are lucky in that most the coded sploits and POCs tend to be cheap in that they tend to look for specifics in a very narrowly focused tunnel. The potentials for something being crafted that is much more insidiously inventive in determing attack vectors that might be non-norm are there. And beaucse they remain at this time 'potential' should not be a reason or rationale to try and place minimally effective or incomplete controls in the security layers one uses. The IT community has been repeatedly bitten by doing less then they know better to do due to the potential of something not yet unleashed, say 1988 for example.
i wrote my post because you say "the non std port advice is not worth much". i have lot of cases, when non standard configuration reduces first impact greatly. of course you shouldn't rely only to non standard ports/configuration, but it is not totally worthless - it often helps you a lot.
Perhaps I should have pre or post pended YMMV <grin!>. Thanks, Ron DuFresne -- "Sometimes you get the blues because your baby leaves you. Sometimes you get'em 'cause she comes back." --B.B. King ***testing, only testing, and damn good at it too!*** OK, so you're a Ph.D. Just don't touch anything. _______________________________________________ Full-Disclosure - We believe in it. Charter: http://lists.netsys.com/full-disclosure-charter.html
Current thread:
- OpenSSH is a good choice? Carlos de Oliveira (Dec 20)
- Re: OpenSSH is a good choice? Andrew Farmer (Dec 20)
- Message not available
- Re: OpenSSH is a good choice? Carlos de Oliveira (Dec 21)
- Re: OpenSSH is a good choice? hutuworm (Dec 21)
- RE: OpenSSH is a good choice? ALD, Aditya, Aditya Lalit Deshmukh (Dec 21)
- RE: OpenSSH is a good choice? Ron DuFresne (Dec 21)
- Re: OpenSSH is a good choice? Willem Koenings (Dec 21)
- Re: OpenSSH is a good choice? Ron DuFresne (Dec 22)
- Re: OpenSSH is a good choice? Willem Koenings (Dec 23)
- Re: OpenSSH is a good choice? Ron DuFresne (Dec 23)
- Re: OpenSSH is a good choice? Ben Hawkes (Dec 24)
- Re: OpenSSH is a good choice? Willem Koenings (Dec 24)
- Re: OpenSSH is a good choice? Ron DuFresne (Dec 25)
- Re: OpenSSH is a good choice? Kevin (Dec 25)
- Re: OpenSSH is a good choice? Ron DuFresne (Dec 27)
- Re: OpenSSH is a good choice? Stian Øvrevåge (Dec 24)
- Re: OpenSSH is a good choice? dk (Dec 24)
- <Possible follow-ups>
- RE: OpenSSH is a good choice? Todd Towles (Dec 23)