lists.openwall.net | lists / announce owl-users owl-dev john-users john-dev passwdqc-users yescrypt popa3d-users / oss-security kernel-hardening musl sabotage tlsify passwords / crypt-dev xvendor / Bugtraq Full-Disclosure linux-kernel linux-netdev linux-ext4 linux-hardening linux-cve-announce PHC | |
Open Source and information security mailing list archives
| ||
|
Date: Sun Jun 4 00:07:11 2006 From: very at unprivate.com (php0t) Subject: Tool Release - Tor Blocker > The purpose of this module is not to increase the security of your server, but to allow you to prosecute hackers after the > fact. If your server has a remotely exploitable vulnerability and you block Tor nodes, you can still be hacked from any > other IP address on the Internet. > The only difference is that blocking Tor force the attackers to use a non-anonymized IP address, which can (at least > theoretically) be traced back to them. I have doubts that this really makes a difference in practice. No see this, and the first sentence is where I think you're wrong. Tor isn't such an age old thing, I guess the point all breaks down to how many 'haxors' - that are tor users as well - would not use or be able to use at least a couple of hops when communicating with the target. In my opinion, whoever used tor in this case and rooted the webserver in question probably knew the fact that he needed to go through some hops and hide his identity - and if there wasn't tor (or in practice, maybe before he ever used tor) he would have just set up non logging proxies on a few hosts, or use a public proxy that was in china - if there wasn't more money involved than (people help me out with this one)... $5000(?), Jason still couldn't catch the hacker, so blocking tor globally won't help the problem more than it hurts privacy towards legit tor users. > Blacklisting IP addresses is no substitute for actually fixing the vulnerabilities on your servers. Right. php0t
Powered by blists - more mailing lists