Home page logo
/

fulldisclosure logo Full Disclosure mailing list archives

Re: reduction of brute force log
From: Bob Radvanovsky <rsradvan () unixworks net>
Date: Tue, 28 Feb 2006 14:26:57 -0600

Yeah...I didn't see that.  I thought those were ports.  My bad...  :((

----- Original Message -----
From: Joachim Schipper [mailto:j.schipper () math uu nl]
To: full-disclosure () lists grok org uk
Subject: Re: [Full-disclosure] reduction of brute force log


On Tue, Feb 28, 2006 at 10:52:27AM -0600, Bob Radvanovsky wrote:
I am going to test these rules out -- this looks REALLy good!
But...I've got just ONE question: why on Earth would you permit
ICMP???

(Outgoing) echo requests and port-unreachable responses (to UDP
packets), just to name a couple.

Source quench and redirect are both powerful, but also more than a
little dangerous to allow.

And what significances are ports 50, 51, 1599, 1600 and 1601?  443 and 80
are HTTP-S and HTTP (respectively), 123 is NTP -- I realize that, but what
are these others ports used for?

We are talking about IP *protocols* 50 and 51, which are ESP and AH -
the IPsec protocols.

The 1599-1601 ports are used to open/close the ssh port, as explained in
the article linked.

This firewall configuration should work as advertised. Of course,
restricting logins to public key authentication should work, and has the
added advantage that one does not try to login from yet another
keylogger-infected Windows box.

              Joachim

-r

*filter
:INPUT ACCEPT [0:0]
:FORWARD ACCEPT [0:0]
:OUTPUT ACCEPT [0:0]
:RH-Firewall-1-INPUT - [0:0]
-A INPUT -j RH-Firewall-1-INPUT
-A FORWARD -j RH-Firewall-1-INPUT
-A RH-Firewall-1-INPUT -i lo -j ACCEPT
-A RH-Firewall-1-INPUT -s 10.0.0.0/24 -j ACCEPT
-A RH-Firewall-1-INPUT -p icmp --icmp-type any -j ACCEPT
-A RH-Firewall-1-INPUT -p 50 -j ACCEPT
-A RH-Firewall-1-INPUT -p 51 -j ACCEPT
-A RH-Firewall-1-INPUT -m state --state ESTABLISHED,RELATED -j ACCEPT
-A RH-Firewall-1-INPUT -m state --state NEW -m tcp -p tcp --dport 22 -m
recent --rcheck --name SSH -j ACCEPT
-A RH-Firewall-1-INPUT -m state --state NEW -m tcp -p tcp --dport 80 -j
ACCEPT
-A RH-Firewall-1-INPUT -m state --state NEW -m udp -p udp --dport 123 -j
ACCEPT
-A RH-Firewall-1-INPUT -m state --state NEW -m tcp -p tcp --dport 443 -j
ACCEPT
-A RH-Firewall-1-INPUT -m state --state NEW -m tcp -p tcp --dport 1599 -m
recent --name SSH --remove -j DROP
-A RH-Firewall-1-INPUT -m state --state NEW -m tcp -p tcp --dport 1600 -m
recent --name SSH --set -j DROP
-A RH-Firewall-1-INPUT -m state --state NEW -m tcp -p tcp --dport 1601 -m
recent --name SSH --remove -j DROP
-A RH-Firewall-1-INPUT -j REJECT --reject-with icmp-host-prohibited
COMMIT


----- Original Message -----
From: Matthijs van Otterdijk [mailto:thotter () gmail com]
To: full-disclosure () lists grok org uk
Subject: Re: [Full-disclosure] reduction of brute force login attempts via
SSH   through iptables --hashlimit


I haven't tried this myself, and I don't know if it is already
suggested,
but this should stop all the pesky scriptkiddies from filling up your
logs.
Might prove to be a better solution, who knows:
http://aplawrence.com/Security/sshloginattack.html

Matthijs
_______________________________________________
Full-Disclosure - We believe in it.
Charter: http://lists.grok.org.uk/full-disclosure-charter.html
Hosted and sponsored by Secunia - http://secunia.com/

_______________________________________________
Full-Disclosure - We believe in it.
Charter: http://lists.grok.org.uk/full-disclosure-charter.html
Hosted and sponsored by Secunia - http://secunia.com/


  By Date           By Thread  

Current thread:
[ Nmap | Sec Tools | Mailing Lists | Site News | About/Contact | Advertising | Privacy ]