Take care with " backdoors", not a good idea. Port scanners ie "nmap"
will find obfuscated servers running on different ports.
On Fri, Feb 21, 2020 at 7:21 AM Michal Schorm wrote:
>
> > In doing this is their danger of making an error and locking myself out
> > of my computer, if so what to avoid
Key based authentication works well in small environments, you
generate the keys (recommend you consider ed25519 instead of RSA,
etc), distribute them across the servers (public keys) and update the
authorized keys file. On the server side you configure SSHD to use
keys vs. passwords (disable passw
Looks fine, CUPSD, is listening on both ipv4 and ipv6. There does not
seem to be anything out of the ordinary. If not already done so,
install and configure a firewall.
You can do 'systemctl status firewalld' to see if firewall is enabled
On Thu, Feb 20, 2020 at 9:44 PM home user wrote:
>
> (on
Another suggestion, get Wireshark for sniffing traffic, run a sniffer
trace as you are using the machine. You'll want to capture any IP
(layer 3) traffic leaving or entering your machine (may want to setup
filters to reduce capture size). This may be a way to start your
analysis.
Disable any servi
If you are thinking of brute-force attacks on open ports, have a look
at "fail2ban" - would use logs on your workstation and your firewall
setup to block attempts.
Are there specific applications/services you are concerned about? If
you are thinking about SSHD, consider use of ssh-keygen for user/
On Wed, Jul 12, 2017 at 6:28 PM, Doug wrote:
>
> On 07/12/2017 02:10 PM, Jon LaBadie wrote:
>>
>> On Wed, Jul 12, 2017 at 12:09:09PM -0500, Dave Ihnat wrote:
>>>
>>> On Wed, Jul 12, 2017 at 10:55:01AM -0400, Frank Pikelner wrote:
>>>>
>>>&
e benefits of running both?
DenyHosts and Fail2Ban do the same thing, with the later able to
protect other applications other than SSH from bruteforce dictionary
attacks by limiting connection attempts.
Fail2Ban uses IPTables, DenyHost uses hosts.deny.
So, you should use one or the other.
Y
the password guess
>> attempts against SSH.
>
> True. Not only that, but also adding DenyHosts.
Yes, DenyHosts is a good measure.
Something else that may be considered is Port Knocking Daemon that
keeps all ports down (i.e. SSH port 22 would not be open), until the
correct knoc
Fred,
It is not complicated finding SSH running on a different port using Nmap:
i.e. nmap -p- -sV
Suggest adding something like Fail2Ban to slow down the password guess
attempts against SSH.
Cheers,
Frank Pikelner
On Wed, Jul 12, 2017 at 2:49 AM, fred roller wrote:
>
>
> On
Have you installed "wireshark-gnome"?
Do that and then run "wireshark"
Best,
Frank
On Fri, Feb 17, 2017 at 1:40 PM, Bob Goodwin wrote:
> .
> What am I doing wrong?
>
> # wireshark
> bash: wireshark: command not found
>
> # dnf install wireshark
> Package wireshark-2.2.4-1.fc25.x86_64 is alread
Hello,
Is anyone successfully using SSSD to authenticate user logins into Fedora
22 against Active Directory. More specifically using AD provider (versus
LDAP) in their SSSD config?
If possible, please share your config (less any confidential info) and any
lessons learned.
Thank you,
Frank
--
On Mon, Nov 17, 2014 at 5:09 PM, Chris Adams wrote:
> Once upon a time, Juan Orti said:
> > systemd-resolved is a daemon for resolving DNS. What's wrong about
> > caching? All DNS servers perform caching.
> >
> > It's like if you have unbound at 127.0.0.1 as local resolver, that's a
> > very com
Though not to distract from Fedora, if you have a complex firewall setup, why
not just use something like pfSense? HA, uses multiple ISP links, nice GUI,
free, BSD
> On Oct 25, 2014, at 2:13 AM, Bill Shirley wrote:
>
>
>> On 10/24/2014 11:45 AM, Bill Davidsen wrote:
>> I have a complex fire
Just to let you know, I run Ubuntu 12.04 and it is very stable on the
T430s. I run Fedora 17/18 on T410 without any issues, but have not tried on
T430s.
Best,
Frank
On Tue, Apr 8, 2014 at 3:31 AM, Pal, Laszlo (private) wrote:
>
> On 04/07/2014 09:30 PM, Oliver Ruebenacker wrote:
>
>
> H
el driver from the separated Intel repo... of
> course it would be the best if Linux can utilize the full power, and I
> mean optimus, but it is just a dream :(
>
> L:
>
>
> On 11 March 2014 17:41, Frank Pikelner wrote:
> > I'm currently running Ubuntu LTR 12.04 on a Len
I'm currently running Ubuntu LTR 12.04 on a Lenovo 430s, so I'm not sure
whether I can be of any assistance. If there is anything you would like me
to post let me know.
Best,
Frank
On Tue, Mar 11, 2014 at 12:20 PM, Pal, Laszlo wrote:
> Hi,
>
> I'm looking for someone with Lenovo T430 :) Curre
On Sun, Dec 23, 2012 at 1:53 PM, Steven Stern <
subscribed-li...@sterndata.com> wrote:
> k to the community, I'd like to use someone's referral code
> when I sign up. I assume it will put some credit onto your account.
>
Referral Code: 58c7ce8ab503c8b08b4c7cc95a66fefc3050107d
Referral URL:
http
Hello,
Installed Fedora 18 with the following additions below, but unable to watch
trailers from Apple with either Chrome v25 or Firefox 17:
sudo yum localinstall –nogpgcheck
http://download1.rpmfusion.org/free/fedora/rpmfusion-free-release-stable.noarch.rpm
sudo yum localinstall –nogpgcheck
htt
Hello,
I'm running a couple of Lenovo T410 with Fedora 16 and 17. The laptops are
generally connected via LAN or WiFi to the same subnet (typically same DHCP
address).
Is there a way to bridge both the LAN and Wifi interfaces so that the
communication is done using the bridge and serviced by eith
pfSense is an excellent solution for your needs. We've used it for years
with multiple ISPs (some years back and it worked very well for us. pfSense
is free and runs FreeBSD at its core with pf from OpenBSD. Nice GUI for
setting everthing up and can even run in redundant mode if you have
multiple p
On Wed, Aug 29, 2012 at 3:40 PM, Arthur Dent
wrote:
> Hello all,
>
> I am part-way through a bare-metal rebuild of my small home server (it
> was F15, I am rebuilding as F17). This machine serves up my IMAP mail
> with Dovecot and Squirrelmail and hosts my small (mainly static)
> website.
>
> The
On Wed, Jun 13, 2012 at 10:49 AM, Mateusz Marzantowicz
wrote:
> On 13.06.2012 16:06, David Mansfield wrote:
>> Hi,
>>
>> In Fedora 17, according to:
>>
>> http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Features/NMEnterpriseNetworking
>>
>> we should have bridge support in NetworkManager. But I can't see any
>> re
On Thu, Nov 24, 2011 at 1:37 AM, Hiisi wrote:
> On 24 November 2011 01:15, Frank Pikelner wrote:
> <--SNIP-->
>>
>> You may want to try Versiera as setup would only be a few minutes.
>> Create an account, download and install the agents. It is simple and
>> wo
On Wed, Nov 23, 2011 at 10:19 AM, Hiisi wrote:
> Hi list!
> This maybe is a little off-topic on this list hence the 'OT' in the
> subject line. Sorry for that.
> I need to gather hardware information from computers on a local
> network and store it on a server. The server runs F16, clients run
> d
24 matches
Mail list logo
