Mailing List Archive

On Jun 17, 2020, at 4:12 PM, Noah <noah@zalev.ca> wrote:
> I could not find anything in the mailing list archive or bug tracker.
>
> In ssh2.h, the value (4) is re-used
>
> 148 #define SSH2_DISCONNECT_KEY_EXCHANGE_FAILED 3
> 149 #define SSH2_DISCONNECT_HOST_AUTHENTICATION_FAILED 4
> 150 #define SSH2_DISCONNECT_RESERVED 4
> 151 #define SSH2_DISCONNECT_MAC_ERROR 5
>
>
> Is this intentional?


It looks like it is. The Internet Draft draft-ietf-secsh-transport up through version 6 defines DISCONNECT_HOST_AUTHENTICATION_FAILED as the value 4, but version 7 and later of the draft and RFC 4253 (which is what that draft eventually turned into) seems to redefine it as DISCONNECT_RESERVED. Here’s a diff between versions 6 and 7 where you can see the change: https://tools.ietf.org/rfcdiff?url2=draft-ietf-secsh-transport-07.txt <https://tools.ietf.org/rfcdiff?url2=draft-ietf-secsh-transport-07.txt>

There isn’t any text added which explains this change, and I don’t see any discussion online about this, but it would appear that DISCONNECT_HOST_AUTHENTICATION_FAILED should not be used.
--
Ron Frederick
ronf@timeheart.net



_______________________________________________
openssh-unix-dev mailing list
openssh-unix-dev@mindrot.org
https://lists.mindrot.org/mailman/listinfo/openssh-unix-dev

Thank you for this explanation. I am starting to research ssh trends in auth logs, but the duplicate value broke my PK in this table. So I now know which to go with.

Thanks,
Noah Zalev


On Wed, 17 Jun 2020 17:51:38 -0700
Ron Frederick <ronf@timeheart.net> wrote:

> On Jun 17, 2020, at 4:12 PM, Noah <noah@zalev.ca> wrote:
> > I could not find anything in the mailing list archive or bug tracker.
> >
> > In ssh2.h, the value (4) is re-used
> >
> > 148 #define SSH2_DISCONNECT_KEY_EXCHANGE_FAILED 3
> > 149 #define SSH2_DISCONNECT_HOST_AUTHENTICATION_FAILED 4
> > 150 #define SSH2_DISCONNECT_RESERVED 4
> > 151 #define SSH2_DISCONNECT_MAC_ERROR 5
> >
> >
> > Is this intentional?
>
>
> It looks like it is. The Internet Draft draft-ietf-secsh-transport up through version 6 defines DISCONNECT_HOST_AUTHENTICATION_FAILED as the value 4, but version 7 and later of the draft and RFC 4253 (which is what that draft eventually turned into) seems to redefine it as DISCONNECT_RESERVED. Here’s a diff between versions 6 and 7 where you can see the change: https://tools.ietf.org/rfcdiff?url2=draft-ietf-secsh-transport-07.txt <https://tools.ietf.org/rfcdiff?url2=draft-ietf-secsh-transport-07.txt>
>
> There isn’t any text added which explains this change, and I don’t see any discussion online about this, but it would appear that DISCONNECT_HOST_AUTHENTICATION_FAILED should not be used.
> --
> Ron Frederick
> ronf@timeheart.net
>
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> openssh-unix-dev mailing list
> openssh-unix-dev@mindrot.org
> https://lists.mindrot.org/mailman/listinfo/openssh-unix-dev
_______________________________________________
openssh-unix-dev mailing list
openssh-unix-dev@mindrot.org
https://lists.mindrot.org/mailman/listinfo/openssh-unix-dev