3 ms·
It's also way less effective than they mentioned because they didn't get hacked either way. So there was 0% difference in effectiveness between port 24 and 22 s
by rjkennedy98 6y ago
It's also way less effective than they mentioned because they didn't get hacked either way. So there was 0% difference in effectiveness between port 24 and 22 since the ssh was properly configured.
Security by obscurity only matters if you aren't secure in the first place. It can be a good extra layer of protection, but the worst examples of security mishaps I've seen are because people find the security unnecessarily burdensome and so they bypass it entirely. So in that way obscurity in that case has a real cost.
- 10000truths 6y agoEven unsuccessful SSH attempts can have operational costs, though. The machine still accepts the TCP connection and does the SSH handshake. If I’m running a server and I’m billed by data usage or by vCPU minutes, I don’t want to waste my allotted resources by making it easy for every half-baked crawler around the world to make connections to my machine. Using a non-default port cuts down those numbers significantly. Sure, a targeted attack won’t be thwarted, but at least the server is not being DDoS’ed anymore.