I administer a couple of systems which provide interactive access by end users, and for this interactive access I position OpenSSH. However, I also use this for administrative access to the system, and I tend to have harder security requirements for OpenSSH than most users do.

For instance, on one system, end users with a userid + password use the sFTP server for publishing static websites. Other access is prohibited, so I really like this OpenSSH configuration to use chrooted users, internal sftp support, whereas a different OpenSSH is used for administrative access (which is only accessible by myself and some trusted parties).

Running multiple instances

Although I might get a similar result with a single OpenSSH instance, I prefer to have multiple instances for this. The default OpenSSH port is used for the non-administrative access whereas administrative access is on a non-default port. This has a number of advantages...

First of all, the SSH configurations are simple and clean. No complex configurations, and more importantly: easy to manage through configuration management tools like SaltStack, my current favorite orchestration/automation tool.

Different instances also allow for different operational support services. There is different monitoring for end-user SSH access versus administrative SSH access. Also the fail2ban configuration is different for these instances.

I can also easily shut down the non-administrative service while ensuring that administrative access remains operational - something important in case of changes and maintenance.

Dealing with multiple instances and SELinux

Beyond enabling a non-default port for SSH (i.e. by marking it as ssh_port_t as well) there is little additional tuning necessary, but that doesn't mean that there is no additional tuning possible.

For instance, we could leverage MCS' categories to only allow users (and thus the SSH daemon) access to the files assigned only that category (and not the rest) whereas the administrative SSH daemon can access all categories.

On an MLS enabled system we could even use different sensitivity levels, allowing the administrative SSH to access the full scala whereas the user-facing SSH can only access the lowest sensitivity level. But as I don't use MLS myself, I won't go into detail for this.

A third possibility would be to fine-tune the permissions of the SSH daemons. However, that would require different types for the daemon, which requires the daemons to be started through different scripts (so that we first transition to dedicated types) before they execute the SSHd binary (which has the sshd_exec_t type assigned).

Requiring pubkey and password authentication

Recent OpenSSH daemons allow chaining multiple authentication methods before access is granted. This allows the systems to force SSH key authentication first, and then - after succesful authentication - require the password to be passed on as well. Or a second step such as Google Authenticator.

AuthenticationMethods publickey,password
PasswordAuthentication yes

I don't use the Google Authenticator, but the Yubico PAM module to require additional authentication through my U2F dongle (so ssh key, password and u2f key). Don't consider this three-factor authentication: one thing I know (password) and two things I have (U2F and ssh key). It's more that I have a couple of devices with a valid SSH key (laptop, tablet, mobile) which are of course targets for theft.

The chance that both one of those devices is stolen together with the U2F dongle (which I don't keep attached to those devices of course) is somewhat less.


To comment as a guest, use "Or sign up with disqus" and then select the "I'd rather post as guest" option.

comments powered by Disqus