mailing list archives
Re: targetted SSH bruteforce attacks
From: merlyn () stonehenge com (Randal L. Schwartz)
Date: Thu, 17 Jun 2010 09:38:02 -0700
"Emmanuel" == Emmanuel VERCHERE <emmanuel.verchere () gmail com> writes:
Emmanuel> SSH daemons using password auth exposed to the Internet _do_
Emmanuel> get bruteforce attempts. I would not recommend moving it to a
Emmanuel> different port than 22 as that would be of very, _very_ little
Emmanuel> help - rather switch to public key auth (plus SPA if you're
Emmanuel> paranoid), et voila.
After being regularly nailed on my port 22, I *did* move it. I've had
only *one* attack since then, down by a factor of 20 or so.
Yes, it's worth it to not be on port 22, as long as you're one of the
few. :) Remember, these bots are going for low-hanging fruit... it's
not worth it for them to hit all 65k ports.
Now, if we *all* move away from 22, your advice is more appropriate.
Randal L. Schwartz - Stonehenge Consulting Services, Inc. - +1 503 777 0095
<merlyn () stonehenge com> <URL:http://www.stonehenge.com/merlyn/>
Smalltalk/Perl/Unix consulting, Technical writing, Comedy, etc. etc.
See http://methodsandmessages.vox.com/ for Smalltalk and Seaside discussion
Full-Disclosure - We believe in it.
Hosted and sponsored by Secunia - http://secunia.com/