Re: Reverse SSH tunelling
"Martin Menhart, B.Sc. - m-sys EDV-Dienstleistungen" <[email protected]>
| Newsgroups | gmane.comp.security.linux |
|---|---|
| Message-ID | <[email protected]> |
I've done a lot ssh-tunneling (back an forth, cascaded-ssh-portforwarding ...) myself, because I think that allowing the the needed ports is better than to allow all ports, then restrict it to the ports needed. SSH-Tunnels ar also very easy to implement and straight-forward. You can "just do it", needing only an ssh-client at hand. I aggree with Glynn in considering a "real" VPN for persistent server-to server-tunnels, although the reverse ssh-tunnelling has it's charm. Not everything is so easily done with this technique (broadcasting, udp, ...). Furthermore to implement a persistent server-to-server tunnel, implies some locking mechanism, that you have to maintain yourself, so I decided to look into VPNning myself and luckily found openvpn! I think openvpn is a good choice because of it's easy setup. Also it should be reasonably secure, since it relys on the security of ssl. It runs in userspace and utilizes one udp-port per connection. If you want to give this a try: http://openvpn.sourceforge.net/ nice tunneling, martin. Glynn Clements schrieb: > Raistlin Majere wrote: > > >> I need some advice .. I have a situation where about fifty servers will >>be located in fifty sites that cannot allow services to be hosted. These >>servers will be in private network space behind firewalls. I can use >>them to 'scp' files out to a common home base server, but sometimes I >>need to access a command line console on these servers. I am thinking of >>having a hourly cron job ssh out to my home base server and leaving that >>tunnel open so that I can access that console, but am looking for the >>specific way of doing this. Security os pf the utmost concern, so I need >>some sort of encrypted tunnel, hence the thought of ssh, but I don't >>know how to do this 'reverse' tunnel... I was also thinking of a 'free >>swan' vpn tunnel .. > > > If you have root on the remote systems, I would suggest using a real > VPN rather than the sort of ad-hoc mechanisms which others have > suggested. The choice of exactly which VPN is likely to be determined > by what you can get through the firewall; e.g. if it only allows TCP, > then you will be limited to a PPP/SLIP-over-SSH/SSL type VPN. >