Brian Mathis wrote: > @James: > As for the "security through obscurity" post, you are missing the > point. Changing the port number that SSH runs on is not "security > through obscurity". Moving an already highly secure service to a > different port so scanners don't hit it automatically is a different > thing. This type of move is purely to reduce the amount of garbage in > one's log file due to automated scans. However, I do agree that there > are probably better ways to handle the situation, such as using rate > limiting. Not to mention that if there is a lot less "garbage", it is much easier to catch something trying to sneak in. So it does have an element of security to it. Patrick