search for: knocker

Hi there, okay so I have a port knocker installed on my remote server so I am trying to bundle a bunch of directories in a single ssh session that rsync establishes. so far all the rsync examples I have seen require a new ssh session for each directory. is there anyway to get something like this into one line and therefore one ssh...

.../httnet/homebase/new/dhcp ssh: connect to host 192.168.129.2 port 22: No route to host rsync: connection unexpectedly closed (0 bytes received so far) [Receiver] rsync error: unexplained error (code 255) at io.c(226) [Receiver=3.1.1] The reason why I change my SSH port is a simple way to keep port knocker robots away. Different hosts use different ports... ------------------ End quote -------------------- Oh, right, so you either need to put that in your .ssh/config file or use -e 'ssh -p 613' on the rsync command. The config file should look like this: Host 192.168.129.2 Port 613

On Thu, 10 Sep 2015 22:50:47 -0400 Robert Moskowitz wrote: > > That will use the default port on the remote host, you can override > > that without specifying the -e if required using -p <port>. > > > $ rsync -ah --stats --delete -p 613 root at 192.168.129.2:/etc/dhcp/ > /home/rgm/data/htt/httnet/homebase/new/dhcp > Unexpected remote arg: root at

...t 192.168.129.2 port 22: No route to host >> rsync: connection unexpectedly closed (0 bytes received so far) >> [Receiver] >> rsync error: unexplained error (code 255) at io.c(226) [Receiver=3.1.1] >> >> The reason why I change my SSH port is a simple way to keep port knocker >> robots away. Different hosts use different ports... >> >> ------------------ End quote -------------------- >> >> Oh, right, so you either need to put that in your .ssh/config file or >> use -e 'ssh -p 613' on the rsync command. >> >> The...

.../httnet/homebase/new/dhcp ssh: connect to host 192.168.129.2 port 22: No route to host rsync: connection unexpectedly closed (0 bytes received so far) [Receiver] rsync error: unexplained error (code 255) at io.c(226) [Receiver=3.1.1] The reason why I change my SSH port is a simple way to keep port knocker robots away. Different hosts use different ports...

...p > ssh: connect to host 192.168.129.2 port 22: No route to host > rsync: connection unexpectedly closed (0 bytes received so far) [Receiver] > rsync error: unexplained error (code 255) at io.c(226) [Receiver=3.1.1] > > The reason why I change my SSH port is a simple way to keep port knocker > robots away. Different hosts use different ports... > > ------------------ End quote -------------------- > > Oh, right, so you either need to put that in your .ssh/config file or use -e 'ssh -p 613' on the rsync command. > > The config file should look like this: &gt...

...break it to you, but all security is security through obscurity in some form or fashion. Some forms of obscurity (such as RSA private keys) are just more obscure than other forms of obscurity (like which of a mere 65,535 ports SSH is listening to today, or what knock code you need for the port knocker to access port 22, or whatever). Brute-forcing is just a way of breaking the obscurity of a password, etc. Even layered security is only as secure as the obscurity of how the layers interact. One of my day job's responsibilities is as site locksmith (and reverse engineering rotating cons...

Hi, while discussing with friends how to 'hide' an ssh-entry to a system (using uncommon ports, "knocking" on a sequence of ports with telnet, etc) we saw the problem you need all that ports open on the client side as well. But maybe on the client side you are just a guest and those ports are locked for a good reason. So we had another idea: using a sequence of login-names

Hi, just a quick note to whoever is maintaining this page: http://wiki.centos.org/HowTos/Network/SecuringSSH The procedure is missing the firewall-cmd calls necessary in EL7: firewall-cmd --add-port 2345/tcp firewall-cmd --add-port 2345/tcp --permanent Also, it may be worth mentioning that semanage is in the policycoreutils-python package, which isn?t installed by default in all stock

Hi, just a quick note to whoever is maintaining this page: http://wiki.centos.org/HowTos/Network/SecuringSSH The procedure is missing the firewall-cmd calls necessary in EL7: firewall-cmd --add-port 2345/tcp firewall-cmd --add-port 2345/tcp --permanent Also, it may be worth mentioning that semanage is in the policycoreutils-python package, which isn?t installed by default in all stock