Re: is ssh tunneling a security risk?
- From: David Kaplan <David.Kaplan@xxxxxx>
- Date: Mon, 20 Oct 2008 10:05:01 +0200
Thanks for the comments.
I guess I have two questions then: (1) is the current setup without
tunnel much more secure? and (2) is there another approach that lets me
get work done without the tunnel? Regarding the first, I can see two
scenarios without a tunnel where you would have the same security
problems/advantages. One is where someone gains access to my machine
and then to the intermediary machine. That person then sets up some
program that waits for me to make the second hop and then uses that
somehow (I am just being hypothetical, I don't know how hard this would
be, which is really the question, but I thought keyboard grabbing
programs were a pretty standard part of the hackers toolbox). The other
is that I can imagine it would be possible for me to somehow home brew a
tunnel - once you can connect from A to B to C somehow, is it that
difficult to run a program on A and B that makes connecting A to C
For the second, the real problem is moving files around (though a
graphical interface is occasionally a problem - you can double ssh -X/-Y
I think, but I believe they have blocked this as well). I have limited
disk space on machine B, but need to move large files around. Even if I
had the disk space, moving them twice is a pain that tends to add a lot
of extra time. Does anyone have a suggestion for solving this problem,
even if it is a hack?
And just to be more specific about my security setup, I don't just ssh
to the intermediate machine. First you connect to a website with one
username/password. At that site, you start a java application that
makes a localhost:port ssh connection available that is really to a
machine behind the firewall. Then you authenticate to that machine with
a different username/password. Then you double ssh to the machine you
On Fri, 2008-10-17 at 11:02 -0700, AMuse wrote:
David: Among other tricks which can be played with SSH tunnels (for--
good or ill, just the facts) are that if you set up your external host
to do "GatewayPorts yes" and open its firewall, you could accidentally
(or intentionally, from your ITSec groups' point of view) allow anyone
in the world to connect to your external host and traverse your SSH
tunnel, in reverse, to the inside of your corporate LAN.
"Security risk" is always a subjective decision made by your IT Security
group based on your organizations' priorities, assets, data, etc -- but
my guess would be that if they feel it's a risk, it's probably due to
your potential to bypass corporate firewalls for incoming traffic.
David M. Kaplan wrote:
My IT department is really heavy on security. From outside the
building, they have a rather complex system setup so that you can get
around the firewall and ssh into a single machine. From there, you have
to ssh into the machine you want to use.
To simplify things, I have been using a tunnel to hop from my machine
directly (through the tunnel) to the machine I want to use in the
building. This has worked fine until a couple of days ago when IT
decided to prohibit tunneling for "security reasons" (attempting to use
the tunnel now responds with "channel 3: open failed: administratively
prohibited: open failed"). This has made it almost impossible to work
with the system.
What I am wondering is exactly what "security risk" does an ssh tunnel
pose? I thought you used an ssh tunnel to enhance security, not the
other way around. Can someone give me a reason why it is a risk to
leave this open or give me good arguments that I can forward to IT for
why they should not prohibit tunneling?
David M. Kaplan
Charge de Recherche 1
Institut de Recherche pour le Developpement
Centre de Recherche Halieutique Mediterraneenne et Tropicale
av. Jean Monnet
34203 Sete cedex
Phone: +33 (0)4 99 57 32 27
Fax: +33 (0)4 99 57 32 95
- Prev by Date: OpenSSH and PAM
- Next by Date: Re: Disable SSH authentication
- Previous by thread: Re: is ssh tunneling a security risk?
- Next by thread: Re: is ssh tunneling a security risk?