Date: Thu, 3 Feb 2005 18:51:52 -0700 From: Pat Maddox <pergesu@gmail.com> To: Gert Cuykens <gert.cuykens@gmail.com> Cc: Chris Hodgins <chodgins@cis.strath.ac.uk> Subject: Re: ssh default security risc Message-ID: <810a540e0502031751e4e7d33@mail.gmail.com> In-Reply-To: <ef60af090502031604391fcbd6@mail.gmail.com> References: <ef60af09050203143220daf9f9@mail.gmail.com> <4202B512.9080306@cis.strath.ac.uk> <ef60af09050203153670e8f27f@mail.gmail.com> <4202BC4E.4090809@cis.strath.ac.uk> <ef60af090502031604391fcbd6@mail.gmail.com>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
You're right, if they hack your account and change your password, you're stuck. You can't log in and get it back. You CAN call your provider up (who presumably has local access) and ask them to boot into single user mode, or login directly, and change your pass/delete the account. You can recover if a hacker breaks your regular user account. If a hacker gets root on your machine...well you're just screwed. So it makes a lot more sense to make it difficult for a hacker to get root. Having to break two accounts is a good way of doing that. On Fri, 4 Feb 2005 01:04:34 +0100, Gert Cuykens <gert.cuykens@gmail.com> wrote: > On Fri, 04 Feb 2005 00:05:34 +0000, Chris Hodgins > <chodgins@cis.strath.ac.uk> wrote: > > Gert Cuykens wrote: > > > On Thu, 03 Feb 2005 23:34:42 +0000, Chris Hodgins > > > <chodgins@cis.strath.ac.uk> wrote: > > > > > >>Gert Cuykens wrote: > > >> > > >>>By default the root ssh is disabled. If a dedicated server x somewhere > > >>>far far away doesn't have root ssh enabled the admin is pretty much > > >>>screwed if they hack his user account and change the user password > > >>>right ? > > >>> > > >>>So is it not better to enable it by default ? > > >>>_______________________________________________ > > >>>freebsd-questions@freebsd.org mailing list > > >>>http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-questions > > >>>To unsubscribe, send any mail to "freebsd-questions-unsubscribe@freebsd.org" > > >>> > > >> > > >>Every unix box has a root account. Not every unix box has a jblogs > > >>account. Lets take the example of a brute-force attempt. The first > > >>thing I would do would be to attack roots password. I know the account > > >>exists. Might as well go for the big prize first. > > >> > > >>So having a root account enabled is definetly a bad thing. > > >> > > >>Chris > > >> > > > > > > > > > Do you agree a user acount is most of the time more vonerable then the > > > root account ? > > > > Assuming you know the username then maybe. It depends on the strength > > of the users password. If they are only using private keys with > > passphrases then you probably won't be getting access that way with any > > account. > > > > > > > > If they can hack the root they can defenatly hack a user account too. > > > So i dont see any meaning of disabeling it. > > > > If they can hack root they own the system and can do what they like. By > > disabling root you remove the option of this happening. Instead they > > have to try and compromise a user account. Once they compromise the > > user account, they then have to gain root access (assuming that is their > > goal). Why bother with the hassle. There are plenty of machines out > > there already with weak root passwords. If a hacker really wants into > > your system he will find a way. > > > > Chris > > True but the point is without the ssh root enabled there is nothing > you can do about it to stop them if they change your user password > _______________________________________________ > freebsd-questions@freebsd.org mailing list > http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-questions > To unsubscribe, send any mail to "freebsd-questions-unsubscribe@freebsd.org" >
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?810a540e0502031751e4e7d33>