Re: Enabling telnet, ftp, pop3 for root...
- From: matt_left_coast <not@xxxxxxxxxx>
- Date: Thu, 06 Apr 2006 02:16:38 -0700
Ertugrul Soeylemez wrote:
Now really, why is that more secure than logging into the root account
directly?
If you allow logging in directly as root, root can be hacked by someone
entering "root" as a user name. Since root is a well known name, part of
the process of hacking the system is already done. All that is needed is to
guess the root password. If you dissallow direct root login, then the
hacker must guess a valid user AND the correct password for that user
before they can even get into the system. They must then figure out how to
get to root. Which is more secure? DISALLOWING DIRECT ROOT LOGIN.
Also, if there is more than one admin, the su will log who used root on the
system and when. If you allow direct root login, then there is no telling
which of the admins was on the system when problems started...
That's a common and very unreasonable misconception.
As you can see, it is not even a misconception, much less a "very
unreasonable one". It is clear you are laboring under some missguided
concepts.
Your
statement holds for non-secure protocols (i.e. Telnet),
And for people logging into directly into consoles as well.
but there you
shouldn't even login as a normal user.
Well, I guess if you babble long enough, you'll get something right just by
random chance.
--
.
- Follow-Ups:
- Re: Enabling telnet, ftp, pop3 for root...
- From: Ertugrul Soeylemez
- Re: Enabling telnet, ftp, pop3 for root...
- References:
- Re: Enabling telnet, ftp, pop3 for root...
- From: Ertugrul Soeylemez
- Re: Enabling telnet, ftp, pop3 for root...
- Prev by Date: Re: Enabling telnet, ftp, pop3 for root...
- Next by Date: Re: Enabling telnet, ftp, pop3 for root...
- Previous by thread: Re: Enabling telnet, ftp, pop3 for root...
- Next by thread: Re: Enabling telnet, ftp, pop3 for root...
- Index(es):
Relevant Pages
|