Skip site navigation (1) Skip section navigation (2)

Re: What's going on with pgfoundry?

From: Steve Crawford <scrawford(at)pinpointresearch(dot)com>
To: jd(at)commandprompt(dot)com
Cc: "Marc G(dot) Fournier" <scrappy(at)hub(dot)org>, David Fetter <david(at)fetter(dot)org>, Kris Jurka <books(at)ejurka(dot)com>, Dave Page <dpage(at)pgadmin(dot)org>, Tatsuo Ishii <ishii(at)postgresql(dot)org>, pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org
Subject: Re: What's going on with pgfoundry?
Date: 2008-11-26 22:24:01
Message-ID: 492DCC81.6000006@pinpointresearch.com (view raw or flat)
Thread:
Lists: pgsql-hackers
Joshua D. Drake wrote:
> On Wed, 2008-11-26 at 18:06 -0400, Marc G. Fournier wrote:
>   
>>     
>>> Since were chatting :P. My vote would be to move everything back to port
>>> 22 and force key based auth only.
>>>       
>> How does that work?  Does that kill the script kiddies in their tracks?  I'm 
>> guessing so, but had never thought to try it ...
>>
>>     
>
> Well they can still talk to the port of course but its irrelevant...
>
>   

Not really. My servers don't allow remote root ssh access at all. But 
all the failed script-kiddie attempts really hose the log files to say 
nothing about wasting my bandwidth.

Cheers,
Steve


In response to

pgsql-hackers by date

Next:From: Marc G. FournierDate: 2008-11-26 22:31:51
Subject: Re: What's going on with pgfoundry?
Previous:From: Pavel StehuleDate: 2008-11-26 22:14:19
Subject: Re: WIP: default values for function parameters

Privacy Policy | About PostgreSQL
Copyright © 1996-2014 The PostgreSQL Global Development Group