Date: Fri, 1 Aug 2008 15:09:42 -0400 From: Jacob Frelinger <jolly@thecoffinclub.com> To: freebsd-current@freebsd.org Subject: Re: [BSD6] SSH Restriction Message-ID: <20080801150942.1aa5e505@thecoffinclub.com> In-Reply-To: <EB0526E758E4764B9B5186295C5790C901A7D094@PUEXCBJ0.nanterre.francetelecom.fr> References: <EB0526E758E4764B9B5186295C5790C901A7CF4E@PUEXCBJ0.nanterre.francetelecom.fr> <20080801121004.GO99951@hoeg.nl> <20080801122640.GH97161@deviant.kiev.zoral.com.ua> <EB0526E758E4764B9B5186295C5790C901A7D094@PUEXCBJ0.nanterre.francetelecom.fr>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
--Sig_/eI_Z_bQxT4Mvh1EQ/Slqxwr Content-Type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable On Fri, 1 Aug 2008 14:36:07 +0200 <karim.bourenane@orange-ftgroup.com> wrote: >=20 > For exactly description.=20 >=20 > We have one user (robot) connect on server with ssh command and > telnet argment to access on some router. The connection is not closed > and cleaned properly. Also the CPU increases dangerously. would limiting the number of connections via ipfw work? I've used it to stop spammers from hammering on mail servers and zombied hosts from hammering on ssh servers. --=20 Jacob "I'm Brainy For Zombie Pops" Frelinger=20 Jolly at TheCoffinClub dot Com=20 http://www.thecoffinclub.com=20 --Sig_/eI_Z_bQxT4Mvh1EQ/Slqxwr Content-Type: application/pgp-signature; name=signature.asc Content-Disposition: attachment; filename=signature.asc -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- Version: GnuPG v1.4.9 (FreeBSD) iD8DBQFIk192O887GYmMIQIRAkGTAJ9GeFgbLW+rmu22T321HmS39i2hKQCg5dke oX+tVuUYnELRlP7WSlBQrq4= =2qWA -----END PGP SIGNATURE----- --Sig_/eI_Z_bQxT4Mvh1EQ/Slqxwr--
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?20080801150942.1aa5e505>