Re: OpenSSH 3.4p1 Trouble on SCO 5.0.5?

In article <47E680EC.7000005@xxxxxxxxx>,
Nico Kadel-Garcia <nkadel@xxxxxxxxx> wrote:
Bill Vermillion wrote:
In article <47E6160C.7080405@xxxxxxx>,
Steve M. Fabac, Jr. <smfabac@xxxxxxx> wrote:
I have a client running SCO 5.0.5 with OpenSSH 3.4p1

Since SSH was installed, we have been getting hits from
people on the Internet scanning port 22.

Normally they give up and go away. However, I have noticed
an unusual number of scans from foreign IP addresses using
valid names on the system (the names below in the block for
a single source IP are the *only* names logged from that


Anybody have any ideas, thoughts or comments on this?

I've seen as high as 10,000 such attemts per day - but these are
on mail and web servers directly connected to a tier 1 backbone
[level 3] in their Orlando colo. They actually switch [not route]
connections across the US so I can see 1 hop from Orlando to
Seattle - that's one reason they carry about 60% of the 'net

But as Nico said in his reply to you, you really shouldn't put SCO
on a directly connected internet.

IMO the ONLY machines that should be do so would be machines
that MUST be connected - eg mail servers and web servers. All
other machines should be behind a firewall.

Ideally 3 NIC cards connected to SWITCHES not hubs, would
have a public access IP, and those sould connect to the second set
[A DMZ area] with such things as your web servers, and the 3rd
NIC would go to your business machines on a totally private network
so nothing from the outside world would ever get through.

It's easy and cheap to set up a separate mail/web server
and keep you important machines hidden. I run on FreeBSD since
swithcing an ISP from SGIs back in 1995 and it can run on a slim
machine and is awfully solid.

If you think you are seeing a lot of attacks, just wait - they get
more numerous as time goes by.

True. And in further thinking about this, I'd counsel doing
something to reduce the number of spurious logs to deal with.
Switching the SSH port to, say, 1022 and making sure there are
no other services on it would help reduce the logging of such
attempts, and leave much less debris in your logs.

That may help a little but I see scans across all the ports in
the daily security logs.


Bill Vermillion - bv @ wjv . com