Re: Change SSH port? why does this seem to be safer?
From: Christopher Browne (cbbrowne_at_acm.org)
Date: 08/30/05
- Next message: Michael Heiming: "Re: Linux HA by multiple NICs - looking for docs"
- Previous message: drwxr-xr-x: "Re: Change SSH port? why does this seem to be safer?"
- In reply to: Mr. Boy: "Change SSH port? why does this seem to be safer?"
- Next in thread: Christopher Browne: "Re: Change SSH port? why does this seem to be safer?"
- Messages sorted by: [ date ] [ thread ] [ subject ] [ author ] [ attachment ]
Date: Tue, 30 Aug 2005 04:53:52 GMT
> So can anyone tell my why changing a port number improves safety?
Ah, well, if you combine it with portsentry, you can make it unlikely
that someone can discover which port SSH is running on before they get
blocked.
Supposing I run ssh on port 7588 (picked at random), that means that
the only way for someone to *find* port 7588 is by searching ports at
random.
I also run portsentry, which blocks out IPs that try to do port scans.
Once a host has scanned a few ports, that host gets added to my
blacklist.
The chances of someone hitting port 7588 before getting blacklisted
are extremely poor.
-- (reverse (concatenate 'string "moc.liamg" "@" "enworbbc")) http://cbbrowne.com/info/ If we were meant to fly, we wouldn't keep losing our luggage.
- Next message: Michael Heiming: "Re: Linux HA by multiple NICs - looking for docs"
- Previous message: drwxr-xr-x: "Re: Change SSH port? why does this seem to be safer?"
- In reply to: Mr. Boy: "Change SSH port? why does this seem to be safer?"
- Next in thread: Christopher Browne: "Re: Change SSH port? why does this seem to be safer?"
- Messages sorted by: [ date ] [ thread ] [ subject ] [ author ] [ attachment ]
Relevant Pages
|
