Re: [Full-disclosure] targetted SSH bruteforce attacks

[merlyn@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx (Randal L. Schwartz)]

>>>>> "Emmanuel" == Emmanuel VERCHERE <emmanuel.verchere@xxxxxxxxx> 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@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx> <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.
Charter: http://lists.grok.org.uk/full-disclosure-charter.html
Hosted and sponsored by Secunia - http://secunia.com/