Re: Locking down SSH, dictionary attacks
"Fabio Portes (aka fpm)" <[email protected]> Fri, 10 Mar 2006 18:23:03 -0300
| Newsgroups | gmane.comp.security.intrusions |
|---|---|
| Message-ID | <[email protected]> |
I really don't know how I became a member of this mailing list ... I just received Andrew's message and realized I am. :) Anyway, Andrew, there are a lot of softwares around there that can detect that kind of abuse and block connections from the abusive source address. Take a look. Google is our friend ! ;) greets, -fpm. On 3/10/06, Smith, Donald <[email protected]> wrote: > Switch to a non standard port and publish that port to your users. > Unless your specifically being targeted you won't see any more > bruteforce attacks. > > > Security through obscurity WORKS against some worms and other tools:) > [email protected] giac > > > -----Original Message----- > > From: [email protected] > > [mailto:[email protected]] On Behalf Of Andrew Daviel > > Sent: Friday, March 10, 2006 1:33 PM > > To: [email protected] > > Subject: [Intrusions] Locking down SSH, dictionary attacks > > > > > > > > FYI - just got zapped by one of those SSH exhaustion scanners > > (again) 1st generation - try 4 accounts e.g. guest/guest > > against everyone 2nd generation - multiple passwords but > > slow, doesn't show above noise on > > individual syslogs > > 3rd generation - who cares, let's blast! 230 tries in 3 minutes > > > > To combat 2nd gen I poll multiple syslogs several times an > > hour, and any source going over a couple dozen failures > > across site is firewalled. > > 3rd gen got lucky before it was blocked a few minutes later > > > > > > So, I'm wondering how to lock down SSH a bit more (on Linux, > > maybe Solaris, MacOS). > > On critical machines with few users, I have disabled password > > logins - keys only, and maybe only listen to certain > > addresses. And on one standalone machine I have set norootlogin. > > > > But what to do with multiuser machines ? Users are likely to > > revolt if told they have to generate keypairs everywhere. (We > > have been reluctant to get into Kerberos, and besides I'm not > > sure without some research whether it would help. Ditto > > PAM-based stuff) What I'd like to do is have different > > authentication requirements for root and for user accounts > > (other than "no root at all") > > > > e.g. > > > > root: > > - must use keys, not password > > - must connect from 10.4.0.0 > > user A: > > - can use keys or password > > - can connect from anywhere > > users B,C: > > - can connect from anywhere with keys > > - can connect from 10.4.0.0 with passwords > > > > ... OK, have just RTFM :-) > > and have now set "PermitRootLogin without-password" > > which does the most important thing > > > > > > ... just checked my home logs .. darn scanners have 2000 > > attempts there, too - so I've just installed my 2nd gen > > blocking script as well as fixing root > > > > Guess if I really want address-based filtering I could run a > > second server on a different port with different config > > options, but this is probably OK for now ... > > > > (if anyone wants my blocking script - simple perl thing using > > iptables - mail me. 3rd gen blocking will probably get > > written, monitoring "tail -f /var/log/secure" ... should > > probably add check for success from scanning source, too) > > > > -- > > Andrew Daviel, TRIUMF, Canada > > Tel. +1 (604) 222-7376 (Pacific Time) > > [email protected] > > > > _______________________________________________ > > Intrusions mailing list > > [email protected] > > http://www.dshield.org/mailman/listinfo/intrusions > > > > _______________________________________________ > Intrusions mailing list > [email protected] > http://www.dshield.org/mailman/listinfo/intrusions > _______________________________________________ Intrusions mailing list [email protected] http://www.dshield.org/mailman/listinfo/intrusions