Live data from Hacker News

Cyber Scarecrow

cyberscarecrow.com

251–253 of 253 posts

Re: Cyber Scarecrow

#251

Earlier quoted context omitted.

To your point, I made this a few years ago using powershell. I just created a stub .exe using csc on install and renamed it to match a similar list of binary names. Maybe I will dig it up...

I uploaded it here. I haven't tested it in years though- https://github.com/0xDigest/odoshi

Looks good! Maybe you could update it to use the list of processes Scarecrow uses? https://pastebin.com/JVZy4U5i

Re: Cyber Scarecrow

#252
post #196

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I've worked in companies with horrendous security, where someone with just a bit of SQL injection experience could have easily carried out the data. Yet, since this was a custom in-house application and your off-the-shelve-scanners did not work, this never happened; the only times the servers were hacked was when the company decided to host an (obviously never updated) grandfathered Joomla instance for a customer. Bu…

> But even more simply, just setting your SSH port to something >10000 is enough to get away with a very mediocre password. Given how easy and free tools like Wireguard are to setup now (thanks Tailscale!), I really don't understand why folks feel the need to map SSH access to a publicly exposed port at all anymore for the most part, even for throw away side projects.

I say leave it at 22 and use public key authentication. If a hacker can crack that, they deserve my server!

Re: Cyber Scarecrow

#253
post #252
post #196

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> But even more simply, just setting your SSH port to something >10000 is enough to get away with a very mediocre password. Given how easy and free tools like Wireguard are to setup now (thanks Tailscale!), I really don't understand why folks feel the need to map SSH access to a publicly exposed port at all anymore for the most part, even for throw away side projects.

I say leave it at 22 and use public key authentication. If a hacker can crack that, they deserve my server!

I mostly agree, but even this leaves you exposed to new bugs found in SSH in the future etc if on an unpatched/forgotten server. I still think its best (and really, really easy now with tools like tailscale) to simply never expose the software to the wide world in the first place and only access over Wireguard.

Fundamentally, it makes no sense to expose low level server access mechanisms to anyone other than yourself/team - there is no need for this to sit listening on a public port, almost ever.

Post reply on HN