similar to: [Bug 1646] New: Match directive does not override default settings

https://bugzilla.mindrot.org/show_bug.cgi?id=3193 Bug ID: 3193 Summary: Add separate section in sshd_config man page on Access Control Product: Portable OpenSSH Version: 8.3p1 Hardware: Other OS: Linux Status: NEW Severity: enhancement Priority: P5 Component:

Hi, SSH brute force attacks seem to enjoy increasing popularity. Call me an optimist or a misrouted kind of contributer to the community, but on our company server I actually go through the logs and report extreme cases to the providers of the originating IP's. With the increasing number of these attacks, however, I have now decided that it's better to move the SSHd to a different

https://bugzilla.mindrot.org/show_bug.cgi?id=1690 Summary: AllowUsers and DenyGroups directives are not parsed in the order specified Product: Portable OpenSSH Version: 5.3p1 Platform: ix86 OS/Version: Linux Status: NEW Keywords: patch Severity: trivial Priority: P2 Component:

https://bugzilla.mindrot.org/show_bug.cgi?id=1546 Summary: sshd_config DenyUsers does not recognize negated host properly Product: Portable OpenSSH Version: 5.1p1 Platform: All OS/Version: All Status: NEW Severity: minor Priority: P4 Component: sshd AssignedTo: unassigned-bugs

Greetings, This request is in the grey area between a bug report and an enhancement request. Request ------- Please apply the following diff (or something functionally similar) to file ``match.c'' in OpenSSH-5.1p1: 161a162,164 > } else { > if (negated) > got_positive = 1; /* Negative match, negated = Positive */ In case the lines above wrapped in the email

The primary purpose of the attached patches is for portable OpenSSH to support changing expired passwords as specified in shadow password files. To support that, I did a couple enhancements to the base OpenBSD OpenSSH code. They are: 1. Consolidated the handling of "forced_command" into a do_exec() function in session.c. These were being handled inconsistently and allocated

Hi, I hope this is the right place for a feature request. I'd like to have more flexible AllowUsers/DenyUsers synax. I am in a situation, where I have machines connected to three networks (a private, high speed, a public, and a private vpn) and I'd like to enable root logins only on the private networks. Currently I see no way of doing this, because there is no way to specify a

Hi all, this is a patch to make Ciphers, MACs and KexAlgorithms available in Match blocks. Now I can reach a -current machine with some Android terminal app without changing the default ciphers for all clients: Match Address 192.168.1.2 Ciphers aes128-cbc MACs hmac-sha1 KexAlgorithms diffie-hellman-group-exchange-sha1 Index: servconf.c

On Thu, Dec 15, 2016 at 4:22 PM, Zev Weiss <zev at bewilderbeest.net> wrote: [...] > I tested (or tried) git commit b737e4d7 on three systems, with somewhat > mixed results. Thanks for the comprehensive testing! > On Mac OSX (macOS?) 10.9, configure failed with: > > ... > checking OpenSSL header version... 1000208f (OpenSSL 1.0.2h 3 May 2016) > checking

Attached is a patch which adds a log= directive to authorized_keys. The text in the log="text" directive is appended to the log line, so you can easily tell which key is matched. For instance the line: log="hello world!",no-agent-forwarding,command="/bin/true",no-pty, no-user-rc,no-X11-forwarding,permitopen="127.0.0.1:7" ssh-rsa AAAAB3Nza....xcgaK9xXoU=

Hi Alon, I confirmed with pkcs11-tool (from OpenSC) and I can confirm that pressing return when asked for the pin causes the login to stop (and not to try a empty pin). Can you confirm if a empty pin is actually a valid pin, and if not, can the patch be accepted? Once again, the problem is that from a user experience, *some/most* users would expect they can skip pkcs11 token authentication just

I apologize for forgetting to pass on all the information. In fact, this problem is occurring because of the migration from a VM with Oracle SunOS to another VM with Oracle Linux 7. This old VM is for production and runs the CACH? database, so we decided to create a new VM and migrate everything to it. We have already migrated the database and users without problems. Only on each machine of these

I want to allow a single host root access via ssh. If the order of processing DenyUsers, AllowUsers were reversed this cold be done in a straight forward manner. My question, is would adding an Apache-like derective Order Deny,Allow violate any standards or be a security problem? _____ Douglas Denault http://www.safeport.com doug at safeport.com

While testing some AllowUsers and AllowGroups combinations I was surprised to find that one cannot be used to override the other. For example: AllowGroups administrators AllowUsers john If john is *not* part of the administrators group, then access is being denied. Is this the expected behaviour? This would force me to create another group just for ssh, something like ssh-admins. This other

The denyUsers / AllowUsers option in openSSH does not satisfy our needs. We want to supply our own software to allow/deny sessions based on time of day. I do not know if PAM can do this, but in any case we can not use PAM. ? Did someone do such a change in openSSH code

Oops, wrong language ;D Okay Rowland. Thank you very much for this help. To the next. <https://www.avast.com/sig-email?utm_medium=email&utm_source=link&utm_campaign=sig-email&utm_content=webmail> Livre de v?rus. www.avast.com <https://www.avast.com/sig-email?utm_medium=email&utm_source=link&utm_campaign=sig-email&utm_content=webmail>.

On 12/04/2008, Ivo Emanuel Gon?alves <justivo at gmail.com> wrote: > On 4/11/08, Ivo Emanuel Gon?alves <justivo at gmail.com> wrote: > > > uuencode ^_^ > > > > Hmm... > > Yes! A Vorbis Comment tag called ART or ALBUMART with a Base64 string > would do the trick and it would not choke existing players. No, vorbiscomments are meant to be

I had the same problem and I believe it was the payload size of the codec. What code are you using? ..o-------------------------------------------------------o. Brian Fertig NOC/Network Engineer Planet Telecom, Inc. Tampa, FL Office -----Original Message----- From: asterisk-users-bounces@lists.digium.com [mailto:asterisk-users-bounces@lists.digium.com] On Behalf Of Federico Alves Sent: Friday,

Hey everyone, After discussing the AllowGroups I think I've discovered a bug. The system is a solaris 8 system and the problem is that when I use AllowGroups with no AllowUsers args, the proper actions happen. Same with AllowUsers and no AllowGroups. When I try to combine the two, none of the Allow directives seem to take. Is it just me or maybe a bug? -James

http://bugzilla.mindrot.org/show_bug.cgi?id=975 Summary: Kerberos authentication timing can leak information about account validity Product: Portable OpenSSH Version: -current Platform: All URL: http://marc.theaimsgroup.com/?l=openssh-unix- dev&m=110371328918329&w=2 OS/Version: All