> REXEC has gotten a bad rap. > Mostly because it starts with R , > and everyone know that the R-commands are insecure...
Well ... yeah. Point taken. Within a certain context, most of that lot is probably just fine. ... > Do the alternate protocols mentioned (MSP/MSGD, UFT) > provide secure communications? Are there > SSL-supporting clients available for VM? UFT intentionally left encryption (and compression) outside of the protocol. The idea was that it was/is "hookable". Within that same certain context, UFT is really quite safe. Even outside of your warm safe and cozy intranet, UFT doesn't need authentication, by design. (It was designed to do what FTP doesn't. It was designed to work like RSCS. It invents a spool space on Unix.) -- R;
