On Tue, Nov 12, 2002 at 03:29:28PM -0800, Todd A. Jacobs wrote: > Define secure
I am looking for a way to serve files that doesn't do clear text passwords or data, where sessions can't be hijacked by a hostile party on the line. In other words, as good as ssh. > and define your environment. No single environment. At home I have a simple minded NATing router from the DSL provider. That provides some protection from the outside world, but nothing foolproof. When I plug my notebook in at home I still ssh into my basement server. When I am communicating over insecure paths, I also use ssh. It works well in both situations. It could be neat to have a file serving technique that I could use internally and across the open internet. Also at work they are trying to tighten things up. For things like ftp and telnet it is obvious that substituting sftp and ssh works really well, is already installed, and is mostly painless. I was thinking there must be a parallel replacement for NFS, but I am beginning to suspect there is nothing easy, and some approaches still use NFS underneath and so leave vulnerabilities on the host machine. (It is nice to not *have* to fully trust every user account, even if you do happen to trust all your authorized human users.) > It all depends on what you're trying to do, and what you're trying > to avoid. Mostly I am trying to understand the options for avoiding being vulnerable to a bad-guy on the network. -kb, the Kent who has always been annoyed by the medieval approach of using firewalls and the false sense of security all those Outlook users get behind the wall. -- redhat-list mailing list unsubscribe mailto:redhat-list-request@;redhat.com?subject=unsubscribe https://listman.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/redhat-list
