OSEC

Neohapsis is currently accepting applications for employment. For more information, please visit our website www.neohapsis.com or email hr@neohapsis.com
 
From: Joseph Scott (josephrandomnetworks.com)
Date: Fri Jan 05 2001 - 19:16:39 CST

  • Messages sorted by: [ date ] [ thread ] [ subject ] [ author ]

    On Fri, 5 Jan 2001, Artem Koutchine wrote:

    #
    # ----- Original Message -----
    # From: "Alfred Perlstein" <brightwintelcom.net>
    # To: "Artem Koutchine" <matrixipform.ru>
    # Cc: "David G. Andersen" <dgapobox.com>; <securityFreeBSD.ORG>;
    # <questionsFreeBSD.ORG>
    # Sent: Friday, January 05, 2001 11:20 PM
    # Subject: Re: Antisniffer measures (digest of posts)
    #
    #
    # > * Artem Koutchine <matrixipform.ru> [010105 12:12] wrote:
    # > >
    # > > > A final solution is simply to encrypt all sensitive traffic at the
    # > > > application layer. Use SSL for http/pop3/etc. Use SSH for remote
    # > > > access. Etc. Not perfect, but works.
    # > >
    # > > Nope, dsniff breaks SSL and SSH1.
    # >
    # > What's wrong with using SSH2? You can use port forwarding over
    # > remote localhost to do it:
    #
    # Hmm.. How do i do that on a Win9x box? How do i make use SSH2
    # when connecting to a POP3/SMTP/HTTP?

            You can get a very nice ssh windows client from :

    http://www.ssh.com/

            Depending on what type of organization you work for you may have
    to pay for licenses. I use it at my office, works nicely.

            I've read through most of this thread and it sounds like something
    that would be helpful is to read up dealing with network security in
    general, IE, it's all about policy. If you don't have the ability to
    inflict consequences for breaking policy then it's likely that no
    amount/type of technology with fix everything 100%. I know it's hard to
    do, but more often than not, internal security boils down to a social
    solution more than a tech one. The policies should drive the technology,
    not the other way around.

            All of that being said, I believe you best bet is to require use
    of "more" secure protocols, IE, they don't send things in the clear. They
    will always be far from perfect, but they'll be a lot better than not
    using them at all.

    ***********************************************************
    * Joseph Scott The Office Of Water Programs *
    * josephrandomnetworks.com joseph.scottowp.csus.edu *
    ***********************************************************

    To Unsubscribe: send mail to majordomoFreeBSD.org
    with "unsubscribe freebsd-security" in the body of the message