Skip to main content

security - Why is SSH key authentication better than password authentication?


This isn't so much a technical question as it is conceptual. I understand the cryptography used in an SSH key is far stronger than a regular password, but I don't understand why it is considered more secure.


Most tutorials I read suggest using SSH key authentication rather than password authentication. But my understanding is that anyone who then has access to a pre-approved client machine will then be able to connect to the server, meaning that the level of security provided by the SSH key is only as strong as the level of security of the physical client machine.


For example, if I setup an SSH key on my phone to connect to my home machine, should I lose my phone and someone manages to unlock it, they will be able to connect to my home machine. I know I can then remove the key for my phone from my home machine, but I'm vulnerable until I realise the client device has been lost/breached.


Have I misunderstood something, or are those valid concerns?



Answer



If your SSH service allows password based authentication, then your Internet connected SSH server will be hammered day and night by bot-nets trying to guess user-names and passwords. The bot net needs no information, it can just try popular names and popular passwords. There's an awful lot of people named john with a password of qwerty123. Apart from anything else this clogs your logs.


If your SSH service only allows public-key authentication, an attacker needs a copy of a private key corresponding to a public key stored on the server. They can't just make random attacks, they have to have prior knowledge of your users and have to be able to steal a private key from the PC of an authorized user of your SSH server.


The fact that private keys are often protected by a long pass-phrase is of secondary significance.


Update:


As comments point out, and as I have experienced, moving your SSH service from port 22 to a high numbered port makes a dramatic difference in the number of unauthorized login attempts appearing in your logs. This is worth doing but I do regard it as a form of security by obscurity (a false sense of security) - sooner or later bot-nets will implement slow stealthy port-scanning or you will be deliberately targeted. Better to be prepared.


I always use a long pass-phrase to protect my private key, I guess this is of particular importance on mobile devices that could more easily be lost or stolen.


Also, http://xkcd.com/538/


Security


Comments

Popular Posts

Use Google instead of Bing with Windows 10 search

I want to use Google Chrome and Google search instead of Bing when I search in Windows 10. Google Chrome is launched when I click on web, but it's Bing search. (My default search engine on Google and Edge is http://www.google.com ) I haven't found how to configure that. Someone can help me ? Answer There is no way to change the default in Cortana itself but you can redirect it in Chrome. You said that it opens the results in the Chrome browser but it used Bing search right? There's a Chrome extension now that will redirect Bing to Google, DuckDuckGo, or Yahoo , whichever you prefer. More information on that in the second link.

linux - Using an index to make grep faster?

I find myself grepping the same codebase over and over. While it works great, each command takes about 10 seconds, so I am thinking about ways to make it faster. So can grep use some sort of index? I understand an index probably won't help for complicated regexps, but I use mostly very simple patters. Does an indexer exist for this case? EDIT: I know about ctags and the like, but I would like to do full-text search. Answer what about cscope , does this match your shoes? Allows searching code for: all references to a symbol global definitions functions called by a function functions calling a function text string regular expression pattern a file files including a file

How do I transmit a single hexadecimal value serial data in PuTTY using an Alt code?

I am trying to sent a specific hexadecimal value across a serial COM port using PuTTY. Specifically, I want to send the hex codes 9C, B6, FC, and 8B. I have looked up the Alt codes for these and they are 156, 182, 252, and 139 respectively. However, whenever I input the Alt codes, a preceding hex value of C2 is sent before 9C, B6, and 8B so the values that are sent are C2 9C, C2 B6, and C2 8B. The value for FC is changed to C3 FC. Why are these values being placed before the hex value and why is FC being changed altogether? To me, it seems like there is a problem internally converting the Alt code to hex. Is there a way to directly input hex values without using Alt codes in PuTTY? Answer What you're seeing is just ordinary text character set conversion. As far as PuTTY is concerned, you are typing (and reading) text , not raw binary data, therefore it has to convert the text to bytes in whatever configured character set before sending it over the wire. In other words, when y

networking - Windows 10, can ping other PC but cannot access shared folders! What gives?

I have a computer running Windows 7 that shares a Git repo on drive D. Let's call this PC " win7 ". This repo is the origin of a project that we push to and pull from. The network is a wireless network. One PC on this network is running on Windows 10. Let's call this PC " win10 ". Win10 can ping every other PC on the network including win7 . Win7 can ping win10 . Win7 can access all shared files on win10 . Neither of the PCs have passwords. Problem : Win10 cannot access any shared files on win7 , not from Explorer, nor from Git Bash or any other Git management system (E-Git on Eclipse or Visual Studio). So, win10 cannot pull/push. Every other PC on the network can access win7 shared files and push/pull to/from the shared Git origin. What's wrong with Windows 10? I have tried these: Control Panel\All Control Panel Items\Network and Sharing Center\Advanced sharing settings\ File sharing is on, Discovery is on, Password protected sharing is off Adapte