gt; really have to be a big linux head to be able to install and use most of
the
> popular linux versions such as RedHat, Suse, Caldera, etc.
>
> Regards,
> Kent
>
> -Original Message-
> From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]On Behalf Of
> John Neiberge
PROTECTED]]On Behalf Of
John Neiberger
Sent: Saturday, February 16, 2002 10:55 AM
To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Subject: Re: RE: Slightly OT: SSH Poll [7:35505]
When I said that it was a pain it meant that we'll have to
change some things operationally which, like most other
security measures, make thing
om: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]On Behalf Of
John Neiberger
Sent: Saturday, February 16, 2002 10:55 AM
To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Subject: Re: RE: Slightly OT: SSH Poll [7:35505]
When I said that it was a pain it meant that we'll have to
change some things operationally which, like mos
I am part of a team that is installing hundreds of switches and routers
for a large transportation company. No SSH anywhere. The traffic on
this infrastructure is "typical" office communications. Probably not
worth securing as strongly as financial information.
-Original Message-
From:
Agreed, at minimum mgmt of the routers would be via a network that had as
its access server ssh only. Ever used a packet sniffer? Try ethereal
using telnet, that'll confirm for you why you should use ssh.
Brian
On Sat, 16 Feb 2002, Kent Hundley wrote:
> John,
>
> I _always_ recommend
When I said that it was a pain it meant that we'll have to
change some things operationally which, like most other
security measures, make things a little more difficult. Just
minor issues, no big deal. One example might be that if I go
to a remote site to do some work, I may not normally ta
John,
I _always_ recommend using ssh instead of telnet wherever possible. In
fact, I can't think of a single good reason not to use it for in-band
management. I'm not sure I understand what you mean by it being a pain
since you change passwords often. I don't see how using ssh is any more of
a
7 matches
Mail list logo
