Mailing List ArchiveSupport open source code!
[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]Re: Linux firewall for a Samba || NT file server
- To: tlug@example.com
- Subject: Re: Linux firewall for a Samba || NT file server
- From: Jonathan Q <jq@example.com>
- Date: Sat, 4 Aug 2001 12:17:45 +0900
- Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
- Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
- Delivered-To: tlug@example.com
- In-Reply-To: <Pine.BSO.4.30.0108041133290.4959-100000@example.com>; from kano-tlug@example.com on Sat, Aug 04, 2001 at 11:38:57AM +0900
- List-Help: <mailto:tlug-request@example.comsubject=help>
- List-Post: <mailto:tlug@example.com>
- List-Subscribe: <mailto:tlug-request@example.comsubject=subscribe>
- List-Unsubscribe: <mailto:tlug-request@example.comsubject=unsubscribe>
- Old-Return-Path: <jq@example.com>
- References: <21DEAE09F017D111969700A0C9840752059DAAB3@example.com> <Pine.BSO.4.30.0108041133290.4959-100000@example.com>
- Reply-To: tlug@example.com
- Resent-From: tlug@example.com
- Resent-Message-ID: <MOHsxD.A.E9B.jl2a7@example.com>
- Resent-Sender: tlug-request@example.com
Tim Hurman (kano-tlug@example.com) wrote: > this may sound nuts but.... if you use ncftp, get the *latest* source > (check regularly) and change it to print a fake version number. if you > use an early version number, it means that potential intruders/script > kiddies will try older vounerabilities and fail. security by obscurity. There are two schools of thought on this: one that holds with the above, one that holds with not doing that, on the grounds that if they try an exploit that they *know* should work on the version number stated but it fails, that will only make (at least some of) them work that much harder to find out why. The worst thing, of course, is that the ones who are encouraged to work harder to find out why are the ones who think they have the talent to beat you. The next thing they do is try out every other exploit they know for that program in any version. Even if they all fail, the least that happens is that your system spends more time under attack than it would if you just showed them the real version and they had no exploits for it. Look at the issues and make your own call, but I tend to be on the "don't do that" side of the fence. If you are running a version of <insert software here> that has no known vulnerabilities, you're better off just showing it's version. If you're running a version with known vulnerabilities, you have bigger problems :-) There are places where a bit of security can be an enhancer, but I generally prefer to practice security through security, rather than obscurity. A bit of obscurity can add season to the dish, but it's not a meal in itself. A (GPLed) product you might want to take a look at for this application is Virtual FTPD: http://startuplinux.com/virtualftpd.html It allows you to have virtual FTP users who have no actual userid or password on your system. This seems like a particularly good complement to a Samba server, where you may also have users who do not have an id and password on the underlying *nix system. This gives you the benefit that if an ID and password should be compromised, the damage that can be done is much more limited because they can't get a shell account. This closes off all exploits that require a local shell. Of course, Virtual FTPD works for users who do have a local login, too. Twoftpd is something also maybe worth a look: http://untroubled.org/twoftpd/ Finally, ditto on the comment to make an anonymous upload directory write only. You may find that warez dudes try to exploit it at first (and periodically), so watch for and delete any bogons that crop up in the upload directory, but they will give up when they find that files check in but they don't check out. Jonathan
- Follow-Ups:
- Re: Linux firewall for a Samba || NT file server
- From: Tim Hurman <kano-tlug@example.com>
- References:
- RE: Linux firewall for a Samba || NT file server
- From: Scott Stone <SStone@example.com>
- RE: Linux firewall for a Samba || NT file server
- From: Tim Hurman <kano-tlug@example.com>
Home | Main Index | Thread Index
- Prev by Date: Re: Soundcard
- Next by Date: Re: Soundcard
- Prev by thread: RE: Linux firewall for a Samba || NT file server
- Next by thread: Re: Linux firewall for a Samba || NT file server
- Index(es):
Home Page Mailing List Linux and Japan TLUG Members Links