|
|
|
|
|
|
by larrywright
5759 days ago
|
|
|
I don't find using hosts.allow terribly useful as the people that tend to want to ssh into servers that I control are often mobile, with IP addresses that change regularly. The point I'm making, though, is that every instance of someone running a dictionary attack against one of my servers was a script kiddie running a tool against a range of IP addresses. Changing the port ssh runs on to something high eliminates this entirely. |
|
|
Those are the attacks you see. The script kiddie with a 0-day would be much less obvious.
There are straight-forward ways to architect your infrastructure such that you solve the dictionary attack problem AND the 0-day problem, none of which require the hand-waving security (and user annoyance) of moving SSH to a non-standard port.
The security provided by a non-standard port is laughable -- it's like putting a child-proof lock on your front door.
If you're worried about dictionary attacks, turn off password authentication. If you're worried about 0-day vulnerabilities in SSH, leverage defense-in-depth (require well-secured VPN connectivity before allowing SSH access). If you're worried about user's machines being compromised and their keys stolen, leverage two-factor auth.