similar to: IP options

[reposted because original was sent in HTML by mistake] I'm seeing something similar to bug 1179 (https://bugzilla.mindrot.org/show_bug.cgi?id=1179), even with the reordered IP options check. For some reason, getsockopt is returning an IP options of length 2, value 00 00. Would Mark Weindling's original patch (https://bugzilla.mindrot.org/attachment.cgi?id=1105) break anything

Hi, openssh-1.2.2p1 seems to have 2 problems on ipv6 (and ipv4 mapped addresses). 1. "BREAKIN ATTEMPT" warnings from ipv4 node 2. X forwarding The following patche fixes them. Thanks. diff -ru openssh-1.2.2p1/canohost.c openssh-1.2.2p1-20000308/canohost.c --- openssh-1.2.2p1/canohost.c Fri Jan 14 13:45:48 2000 +++ openssh-1.2.2p1-20000308/canohost.c Wed Mar 8 00:25:18 2000 @@

Hi All. While working on something I noticed a regression failure on Solaris 8. It turned out to be present in -cvs and wasn't due to my changes. One of the tests that fail is basically: ssh -2 -F $build/regress/ssh_proxy 999.999.999.999 true The server reports: sshd[20529]: Disconnecting: Command terminated on signal 11. The culprit seems to be session.c line 1019 or so: snprintf(buf,

I read an article today about keyboard interactive auth allowing bruteforcing. I'm afraid I have minimal understanding of what keyboard-interactive really does. What does it do, and should I have my clients set it to off in sshd_config? --- Scott Neugroschl | XYPRO Technology Corporation 4100 Guardian Street | Suite 100 |Simi Valley, CA 93063 | Phone 805 583-2874|Fax 805 583-0124 |

Hi everyone, I know scp is kind of the red-headed stepchild of the suite, but I'd like to propose an extension to the syntax for remote-remote passthrough using the "-3" option. Currently the syntax is essentially scp -3 [ -P port ] [user@]host1:file [user@]host2:file This is great, as long as both remotes are on the same port. It causes difficulties if host1 and host2 are not

I'm working from modified 5.0p1 codebase. What I'm looking for is a mechanism to limit the number of simultaneous connections on a per-user/IP basis. That is, disallow multiple simultaneous logins/authentication of the same user from different IP addresses. e.g.: fred from 10.1.1.1 - accept fred from 10.1.1.2 -- reject while fred is still connected from 10.1.1.1 fred from 10.1.1.1 - OK

Quoth Iain: >I'm not sure if the work being done to allow OpenSSH to be built without OpenSSL includes SHA-1 support. Hi Iain. I haven't heard of this effort before. Can you give a few more details? Thanks, ScottN --- Scott Neugroschl | XYPRO Technology Corporation 4100 Guardian Street | Suite 100 |Simi Valley, CA 93063 | Phone 805 583-2874|Fax 805 583-0124 |

Oops. That's -T. From the man page, it doesn't really look like there's an ssh_config option for -N. -----Original Message----- From: openssh-unix-dev [mailto:openssh-unix-dev-bounces+scott_n=xypro.com at mindrot.org] On Behalf Of Scott Neugroschl Sent: Tuesday, August 09, 2016 1:04 PM To: Volker Diels-Grabsch; openssh-unix-dev at mindrot.org Subject: RE: Equivalent ssh_config

A couple of notes about mget/mput in SFTP (5.1p1). 1. They aren't documented in the SFTP man page 2 They misbehave -- "mput a.txt b.txt" copies a.txt to b.txt on the server "mput *.txt b.txt" copies the first wildcard match to b.txt on the server "mput a.txt b.txt c.txt" copies a.txt to b.txt on the server "mput a.txt

I'm using 5.0p1 (Yeah, yeah. I know.). For various reasons, I am unable to upgrade to the latest and greatest, which probably would solve my problem. Here's my question. When doing an scp from remote to local (e.g.: scp user at host:remote localfile), is there any way to specify the path to the remote scp? Or do I have to patch the code to allow it? ---- Scott

I haven't been keeping up with the internals, I'm afraid. Does OpenSSH have support for Port Knocking? I might be interested in looking into that, as a way of reacquainting myself with the current code base. --- Scott Neugroschl | XYPRO Technology Corporation 4100 Guardian Street | Suite 100 |Simi Valley, CA 93063 | Phone 805 583-2874|Fax 805 583-0124 |

I may have asked this before ... my memory is bad. Is it possible to run "make tests" on a cross-compile build? --- Scott Neugroschl | XYPRO Technology Corporation 4100 Guardian Street | Suite 100 |Simi Valley, CA 93063 | Phone 805 583-2874|Fax 805 583-0124 |

On 13/04/18 07:59, Josh Soref wrote: > Randall S. Becker <rsbecker at nexbridge.com> wrote: > >> -REGRESSTMP = "$(PWD)/regress" >> +REGRESSTMP = `pwd` >> >> ? tests interop-tests t-exec unit: regress-prep regress-binaries >> $(TARGETS) >> > It looks like the problem is that pwd is in uppercase, not so much the > distinction between

On Thu, Apr 20, 2017 at 11:00 AM, Scott Neugroschl <scott_n at xypro.com> wrote: > > On Wed, Apr 19, 2017 at 1:02 PM, navern <livingdeadzerg at yandex.ru> wrote: > >> Is there any available tool with this for pre-evaluating the resulting sshd_config for fatal errors? I'm not demanding: I'm thinking "that could be really, really useful". > >

You need to disable ?ChallengeResponse? (aka keyboard-interactive) authentication, not password authentication, to protect against this attack. On Jul 22, 2015, at 1:56 PM, Bostjan Skufca <bostjan at a2o.si> wrote: > > And to answer your question about what to do, you have three options: > - disable access to ssh with a firewall > - disable password authentication > -

>> However - as I got into that - I realized that I have no way to "find" >> just the keys for a single user. Since the only argument to that ssh >> keys command, is the username. It's not HTTP so I couldn't point at a >> subdomain and use that to look up the information. >You may be interested in the bug report "extend the parameters to the

Hello, I've trawled archives looking for changes in the "AllowUsers" option, manuals, changes log, reported bugs and to my surprise I can't find anything or anyone that has reported the issues that I am experiencing. I am using the default installation sshd_config file as supplied by Redhat and the only options I have changed are: ListenAddress AllowUsers The first problem

I'm seeing something unusual in 5.0p1. Let me start by saying that I'm on kind of an oddball system (HP NonStop). What I'm seeing is that at the end of an scp session, the server gets stuck in a loop. First I see a shutdown failure, followed by looping on an "ibuf_empty delayed efd 9/(0)" condition. This may have to do with some minor semantic differences in the way the

I'm wondering about the rationale behind the allocation of the fd_set for the select() call in bsd-poll.c. Is there a reason we're dynamically allocating the fd_sets using nmemb, rather than simply putting three fd_set variables on the stack, followed by FD_ZERO calls? This seems to make life more difficult, as evidenced by the "goto out" statement, needed to free the memory.

Does anyone have a patch (doesn't have to be official) to enable the "none" cipher? I need to examine some wire protocol stuff ---- Scott Neugroschl XYPRO Technologies scott_n at xypro.com 805-583-2874 x133