Date: Wed, 23 Jan 2008 02:59:21 +0100 From: mouss <mouss@netoyen.net> Cc: freebsd-security@freebsd.org Subject: Re: denyhosts-like app for MySQLd? Message-ID: <47969F79.30500@netoyen.net> In-Reply-To: <479606E4.2070607@opengea.org> References: <47946AD3.2020601@opengea.org> <47953894.8020906@netoyen.net> <479606E4.2070607@opengea.org>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
Jordi Espasa Clofent wrote: >> why do you open your mysql port to the world? >> >> if you want to let users in from any place, then an ssh tunnel is >> safer (yes, works even on windows, using putty or whatever. and a >> user who finds this difficult shouldn't be able to run sql commands!). > > I completely agree with you; the problem is always the same: the > decisions are taken by non-technical staff in a lot of times. > I've proposed a ssh tunnels for MySQL remote connections... but it > means "so hard" for final customers.... I know it's not easy. but depending on your customers, you may have some chances! - if they can buy a license for sqlyog, it will support sql tunnels directly (otherwise, you need an external tunnel, which you can setup with putty or whatever). - it should not be hard to use an ssl tunnel (stunnel or whatever) - you might be able to ask what IPs are supposed to get there. even if it's not precise, this could reduce risks by only allowing few networks. > >> If this is too much, at least use a different port to reduce the >> noise (This won't add security, but will somehow limit >> exposure).scribe@freebsd.org" > > Of course. > This is generally consider "security by obscurity". I don't think so. This is making it harder for an attacker to get there without being noticed. while a script kiddie can run his script to try a stand port, if he wants to get inside a "local" port, he'll need to try many ports and for each port try the right protocol. This gives us time to get him.
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?47969F79.30500>