[NTLUG:Discuss] Strange iptables problem on CentOS 4.4

[. Daniel]

>Chris Cox wrote:
> > . Daniel wrote:
> >
> >> That's an interesting question.  I had seen something like that not 
too
> >> long ago.  It too was CentOS 4.4 in fact.  I think when I saw the 
error, I
> >> hadn't yes corrected a router configuration mistake I had made.  I was
> >> attempting to forward all data for a given IP address to a specific 
machine
> >> within the firewall.  What I failed to do was make the machines 
responses
> >> MASQ through the same IP address.  Once I made the Masq correction, it
> >> worked just fine.
> >>
> >> My first impression was that "hey, this must be the 'secure' part of 
ssh."
> >> I still don't understand why ssh is better than telnet... other than 
the
> >> plain text thing, but then again, who will be sniffing in average
> >> situations?
> >>
> >
> > You would be surprised.  Think of the poor folks on cable (a giant
> > neighborhood ethernet hub).... very easy to sniff out passwords
> > and such.
> >
> >
> > _______________________________________________
> > http://www.ntlug.org/mailman/listinfo/discuss
> >
> >
>A couple of other things to consider:  Maybe the question shouldn't be
>"Who will be sniffing?" but "What damage could be done if they do?"
>Another way to view this is to ask "What is the cost/benefit?"  The
>"cost" for using ssh seems to be pretty low - a little setup and some
>performance hit for the encryption (which may not matter depending on
>what you are doing).  The benefit is in greatly reduced worry about
>"what if".  If you are sniffed how much damage could be done by gaining
>the user name and password?  Another consideration may be your
>reputation.  Depending on the context, using an insecure protocol,
>regardless if anything happens, may be perceived negatively.
>
>Not knowing your situation I can't answer any of these questions.  I do
>believe that they should be given serious consideration though.

I guess I can sort of understand what you're trying to say, but I don't 
fully understand the benefits.  For example, at a previous job, I couldn't 
telnet into most of the Linux boxen, but ssh was available.  By default, 
even when telnet is available, root isn't available as a user.  However, 
with ssh, it is.  I have never set up ssh before.  It either is or it isn't 
as far as I know.  So as far as I am concerned, ssh is rather like https.  
The two points have established an encrypted link.

But fundamentally, I have to wonder about perceptions.  Is it better to use 
something you don't fully understand simply because other people do?  Or is 
it better to understand what you're doing?  I have always subscribed to the 
latter as the former never made much sense to me.  Been like that since I 
was a little boy though, so maybe it's just me.

_________________________________________________________________
大切なあの人、気になるあの人とケータイでチャット！ 
http://messenger.live.jp/mobile.htm