Re: Some new SSH exploit script?

[Erin Carroll <amoeba () amoebazone com>]

Since amoebazone seems to be a popular target for the kiddiez out there 
(the joys of a pen-test list moderator), I'll add my 2 pesos.


> > > >  I beg to differ with you -- running a standard service on a 
> > > non-standard
> > > >  port is a bid for security through obscurity.
> >
> > I don't see what the net effect is.  You'll still see unauthorized 
> > connection
>
>  The net effect is (currently) that this silly attempts are no longer
>  spoiling the logfiles. On one host I moved my sshd to some other port
>  as well. Not because of security concerns but simply to better view my
>  log entries.

I have to agree with Christine here. The only advantage of moving to a 
non-standard port is minimizing automated attacks and reduced logfile 
noise. This isn't a security measure, more like a sanity measure. A 
determined/skilled attacker will still find the open port, fingerprint it 
with amap or similar to determine servicetype, and point exploit du jour 
to the right place.

As you both stated, if you're vulnerable, you're vulnerable... moving to 
non-standard port only ensures the ones targetting you have some semblance 
of clue (or aren't bots).


>  access. A single syn doesn't worry me. An endless chain of syns to a
>  specific port will raise questions directed to the location the syns
>  originate from. But honestly, this only happens on rare occasions.

Lucky you. I get 1-3k+ ssh attempts per day. For a while now I've gone 
through the source IP's to compile a list of compromised machines or 
attackers but it's just not worth the effort. I've finally decided to 
install fail2ban to blackhole IP's of multiple failed attempts to reduce 
log chatter.


>  For what? It's not necessary. Since the day I moved the port I just
>  saw one single attempt to connect to that host on that port, which does
>  not belong to the allowed ones. And that one checked it for being a web-
>  server.

The only thing holding me back from changing to a non-standard is the 
amount of machine hopping I have to do at the day job and the existing FW 
allows outbound making moving to a non-standard more trouble than it's 
worth.


--
Erin Carroll
moderator, SecurityFocus pen-test list
"I am magically delicious"

------------------------------------------------------------------------------
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.
------------------------------------------------------------------------------