Date: Sat, 22 Oct 2011 10:23:23 -0500 (CDT) From: Robert Bonomi <bonomi@mail.r-bonomi.com> To: freebsd-questions@freebsd.org Subject: Re: Breakin attempt Message-ID: <201110221523.p9MFNNjZ019344@mail.r-bonomi.com> In-Reply-To: <20111022161242.11803f76.freebsd@edvax.de>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
> Date: Sat, 22 Oct 2011 16:12:42 +0200 > From: Polytropon <freebsd@edvax.de> > Subject: Re: Breakin attempt > > On Sat, 22 Oct 2011 15:08:50 +0100, Bruce Cran wrote: > > I suspect that these sorts of attacks are fairly normal if you're > > running ssh on the standard port. I used to have lots of 'break-in > > attempts' before I moved the ssh server to a different port. > > Is there _any_ reason why moving from port 22 to something > different is _not_ a solution? > > Reason why I'm asking: Moving SSH away from its default port > seems to be a relatively good solution as break-in attempts > concentrate on default ports. So in case a sysadmin decides > to move SSH to a "hidden" location, what could be an argument > against this decision? Arguements aginst doing so are generally based on the "'security by obscurity' is not security" concept. That argument _is_ 'technically accurate'. <grin> Moving sshd to a non-standard port does _not_ do anything to make the system any more secure. Of course, as long as one understands that that _is_ the case, and is doing it for 'some other' defensible reason -- such as to eliminate logfile 'noise' from script-kiddie 'doorknob rattlers' -- doing so *is* perfectly reasonable. *I* do it on _my_ machines, expressly for the reason stated in the prior paragraph.
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?201110221523.p9MFNNjZ019344>