Re: brute force ssh attack
From: Nigel Wade (nmw_at_ion.le.ac.uk)
Date: 04/29/05
- Previous message: Steve Snyder: "What process throttles CPU?"
- In reply to: Matthew Miller: "Re: brute force ssh attack"
- Next in thread: Matthew Miller: "Re: brute force ssh attack"
- Reply: Matthew Miller: "Re: brute force ssh attack"
- Messages sorted by: [ date ] [ thread ] [ subject ] [ author ]
Date: Fri, 29 Apr 2005 11:57:24 +0100 To: For users of Fedora Core releases <fedora-list@redhat.com>
Matthew Miller wrote:
> On Thu, Apr 28, 2005 at 09:41:17AM +0100, Nigel Wade wrote:
>
>>For a virus to be viable it has to be communicable. In this instance the
>>virus required manual "injection". Hence the 0-49 infections in 3 years,
>>and the virutally zero threat.
>
>
> But it wasn't quite manual -- happened through sloppy practices. This is
> somewhat akin to saying that STDs are ~0 threat -- true, but only if you
> follow safe procedures. :)
It was completely manual, the virus didn't install itself. It was injected
by someone breaking in via ssh and then manually downloading an infected
file. It's not like a STD, it's like a virus which can only be spread by
direct injection.
>
> Where are you getting your "0-49" number from?
>
That's the number of infections quoted by Symantec.
--
Nigel Wade, System Administrator, Space Plasma Physics Group,
University of Leicester, Leicester, LE1 7RH, UK
E-mail : nmw@ion.le.ac.uk
Phone : +44 (0)116 2523548, Fax : +44 (0)116 2523555
--
fedora-list mailing list
fedora-list@redhat.com
To unsubscribe: http://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-list
- Previous message: Steve Snyder: "What process throttles CPU?"
- In reply to: Matthew Miller: "Re: brute force ssh attack"
- Next in thread: Matthew Miller: "Re: brute force ssh attack"
- Reply: Matthew Miller: "Re: brute force ssh attack"
- Messages sorted by: [ date ] [ thread ] [ subject ] [ author ]
Relevant Pages
|
|