Groups | Search | Server Info | Keyboard shortcuts | Login | Register [http] [https] [nntp] [nntps]

Groups > comp.os.linux.networking > #4333 > unrolled thread

Increased SSH breakin attempts

Back to article view | Back to comp.os.linux.networking

Contents

  Increased SSH breakin attempts Harold Johanssen <noemail@please.net> - 2019-04-03 20:17 +0000
    Re: Increased SSH breakin attempts Lew Pitcher <lew.pitcher@digitalfreehold.ca> - 2019-04-03 16:38 -0400
      Re: Increased SSH breakin attempts Harold Johanssen <noemail@please.net> - 2019-04-03 21:13 +0000
        Re: Increased SSH breakin attempts Grant Taylor <gtaylor@tnetconsulting.net> - 2019-04-03 15:23 -0600
      Re: Increased SSH breakin attempts "Carlos E.R." <robin_listas@es.invalid> - 2019-04-03 23:14 +0200
    Re: Increased SSH breakin attempts Dick <rsutton43@comcast.net> - 2019-04-03 17:33 -0400
      Re: Increased SSH breakin attempts Harold Johanssen <noemail@please.net> - 2019-04-03 22:01 +0000
        Re: Increased SSH breakin attempts William Unruh <unruh@invalid.ca> - 2019-04-04 00:27 +0000
          Re: Increased SSH breakin attempts Harold Johanssen <noemail@please.net> - 2019-04-04 14:02 +0000
            Re: Increased SSH breakin attempts William Unruh <unruh@invalid.ca> - 2019-04-04 18:22 +0000
              Re: Increased SSH breakin attempts Harold Johanssen <noemail@please.net> - 2019-04-04 19:15 +0000
    Re: Increased SSH breakin attempts William Unruh <unruh@invalid.ca> - 2019-04-03 21:51 +0000
      Re: Increased SSH breakin attempts Jorgen Grahn <grahn+nntp@snipabacken.se> - 2019-04-05 18:08 +0000
        Re: Increased SSH breakin attempts William Unruh <unruh@invalid.ca> - 2019-04-05 18:45 +0000
          Re: Increased SSH breakin attempts Jorgen Grahn <grahn+nntp@snipabacken.se> - 2019-04-05 22:24 +0000
          Re: Increased SSH breakin attempts Richard Kettlewell <invalid@invalid.invalid> - 2019-04-06 11:40 +0100
            Re: Increased SSH breakin attempts "Carlos E.R." <robin_listas@es.invalid> - 2019-04-06 12:53 +0200
            Re: Increased SSH breakin attempts William Unruh <unruh@invalid.ca> - 2019-04-06 18:13 +0000
              Re: Increased SSH breakin attempts "Carlos E.R." <robin_listas@es.invalid> - 2019-04-06 20:28 +0200
                Re: Increased SSH breakin attempts William Unruh <unruh@invalid.ca> - 2019-04-06 18:54 +0000
                Re: Increased SSH breakin attempts Richard Kettlewell <invalid@invalid.invalid> - 2019-04-07 08:08 +0100
                  Re: Increased SSH breakin attempts William Unruh <unruh@invalid.ca> - 2019-04-07 15:43 +0000
                    Re: Increased SSH breakin attempts Richard Kettlewell <invalid@invalid.invalid> - 2019-04-07 16:52 +0100

Page 2 of 2 — ← Prev page 1 [2]

#4359

"Carlos E.R." <robin_listas@es.invalid> writes:
> On 06/04/2019 20.13, William Unruh wrote:
>> On 2019-04-06, Richard Kettlewell <invalid@invalid.invalid> wrote:
>>> In any case password-based authentication is disabled for those
>>> systems.
>> 
>> Is it really cler that passwordless login is better? 
>> If they get into a machine which you allow
>> remote access to your machine/account,  they have access to your
>> machine

Also true when passwords are used.

>> So are you sure that all of the machines that you allow to
>> access your system are safe as well, that none of the users on those
>> machines have weak passwords? 
>
> There may be some confussion here.
>
> It is possible to access an ssh site without using the password of the
> site, by using a key pair (RSA? PKCS?). But access to these keys needs
> another password, which may be disabled (I don't). Rather, the desktop
> remembers the passphrase to access the keys for ssh access, so it seems
> passwordless but it isn't.
>
> An attacker that gets access to that client machine doesn't get access
> to the server - however, the client machine may have both key files
> stored. Are those two enough to get access?

We did this one in January. Once someone has broken into a login, they
can capture passwords subsequently entered by the legitimate user of
that login, or take control of established connections.

-- 
https://www.greenend.org.uk/rjk/

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#4360

On 2019-04-07, Richard Kettlewell <invalid@invalid.invalid> wrote:
> "Carlos E.R." <robin_listas@es.invalid> writes:
>> On 06/04/2019 20.13, William Unruh wrote:
>>> On 2019-04-06, Richard Kettlewell <invalid@invalid.invalid> wrote:
>>>> In any case password-based authentication is disabled for those
>>>> systems.
>>> 
>>> Is it really cler that passwordless login is better? 
>>> If they get into a machine which you allow
>>> remote access to your machine/account,  they have access to your
>>> machine
>
> Also true when passwords are used.
>
>>> So are you sure that all of the machines that you allow to
>>> access your system are safe as well, that none of the users on those
>>> machines have weak passwords? 
>>
>> There may be some confussion here.
>>
>> It is possible to access an ssh site without using the password of the
>> site, by using a key pair (RSA? PKCS?). But access to these keys needs
>> another password, which may be disabled (I don't). Rather, the desktop
>> remembers the passphrase to access the keys for ssh access, so it seems
>> passwordless but it isn't.
>>
>> An attacker that gets access to that client machine doesn't get access
>> to the server - however, the client machine may have both key files
>> stored. Are those two enough to get access?
>
> We did this one in January. Once someone has broken into a login, they
> can capture passwords subsequently entered by the legitimate user of
> that login, or take control of established connections.
>

But now this is on a remote machine, not on your machine, and on remote
users. And that gives them access to your machine via the passwordless
login. 

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#4361

William Unruh <unruh@invalid.ca> writes:
> On 2019-04-07, Richard Kettlewell <invalid@invalid.invalid> wrote:
>> "Carlos E.R." <robin_listas@es.invalid> writes:
>>> On 06/04/2019 20.13, William Unruh wrote:
>>>> On 2019-04-06, Richard Kettlewell <invalid@invalid.invalid> wrote:
>>>>> In any case password-based authentication is disabled for those
>>>>> systems.
>>>> 
>>>> Is it really cler that passwordless login is better? 
>>>> If they get into a machine which you allow
>>>> remote access to your machine/account,  they have access to your
>>>> machine
>>
>> Also true when passwords are used.
>>
>>>> So are you sure that all of the machines that you allow to
>>>> access your system are safe as well, that none of the users on those
>>>> machines have weak passwords? 
>>>
>>> There may be some confussion here.
>>>
>>> It is possible to access an ssh site without using the password of the
>>> site, by using a key pair (RSA? PKCS?). But access to these keys needs
>>> another password, which may be disabled (I don't). Rather, the desktop
>>> remembers the passphrase to access the keys for ssh access, so it seems
>>> passwordless but it isn't.
>>>
>>> An attacker that gets access to that client machine doesn't get access
>>> to the server - however, the client machine may have both key files
>>> stored. Are those two enough to get access?
>>
>> We did this one in January. Once someone has broken into a login, they
>> can capture passwords subsequently entered by the legitimate user of
>> that login, or take control of established connections.
>
> But now this is on a remote machine, not on your machine, and on remote
> users. And that gives them access to your machine via the passwordless
> login. 

I feel like you’re not really reading what I wrote.

-- 
https://www.greenend.org.uk/rjk/

[toc] | [prev] | [standalone]

Page 2 of 2 — ← Prev page 1 [2]

Back to top | Article view | comp.os.linux.networking

csiph-web