Obscurity Is a Valid Security Layer

Re:Obscurity Is a Valid Security Layer by justinsaccount on Tuesday June 07, 2016 @03:11PM (#11856948)

> I can copy your knock and get access,

You can? how? I just logged into a server using port knocking. what was my knocking sequence? What do you have access to?

> I can deny you service by messing up your knocks by sending packets with a fake IP

Ok, I'm ready when you are.

> insanely inefficient in the amount of data and time spent vs the amount of information exchanged

I don't even know what this means. How is a few extra packets at the start of a tcp connection "insanely inefficient" ?

[ Parent | on HN ]

Re:Obscurity Is a Valid Security Layer by tptacek on Tuesday June 07, 2016 @03:37PM (#11857149)

Who cares? Serious attackers have access to the actual TCP connection you make to sshd. If there's a preauth vulnerability in sshd, they'll just use that to deliver the payload.

Port knocking is silly. If you're scared of preauth sshd zero-day, deploy an encrypted tunnel.

[ Parent | on HN ]

Re:Obscurity Is a Valid Security Layer by Nokinside on Wednesday June 08, 2016 @12:29PM (#11863430)

How big percentage of attackers have access to TCP connection and can do MITM attack?

[ Parent | on HN ]

Re:Obscurity Is a Valid Security Layer by drudru11 on Tuesday June 07, 2016 @05:25PM (#11858009)

Serious attackers have physical access

[ Parent | on HN ]

Re:Obscurity Is a Valid Security Layer by tptacek on Tuesday June 07, 2016 @05:36PM (#11858105)

1. No.

2. What's your point?

[ Parent | on HN ]

Re:Obscurity Is a Valid Security Layer by penguinduck on Wednesday June 08, 2016 @03:50AM (#11860694)

Now you are being intentionally obtuse. Bye.

[ Parent | on HN ]