Why there are problems to enhace GNU/Hurd?
Enhance the Hurd how exactly? With flawed security?
Sooner or later hurd/random(?) server will be added to the base
system...why not now?
Because it is broken (in the sense of no good entropy source). Fix the
problems, and it might get added.
On Tue, Dec 17, 2002 at 12:42:59PM +0100, Alfred M. Szmidt wrote:
>I support the addition of ssh, *even* with a weak random.
>
> There was never any talk about removing ssh.
>
>Now, what's current best practice? We use this:
> http://kilobug.free.fr/hurd/random-64.tar.gz
>Is the
I support the addition of ssh, *even* with a weak random.
There was never any talk about removing ssh.
Now, what's current best practice? We use this:
http://kilobug.free.fr/hurd/random-64.tar.gz
Is there a better alternative(s)?
Or you can copy /bin/bash to /dev/urandom, they are
> I support the addition of ssh, *even* with a weak random.
ssh is not being excluded; it is in the archive, if you want it, you
just have to set it up yourself. By helping the user with this
horrible kludge--essentially installing pregenerated host keys--we are
creating a false sense of security
On Tue, 17 Dec 2002, Budi Rahardjo wrote:
> Even ssh/ssl had problems, but that doesn't stop people from
> using it *right now*. ie. not waiting until it is really ... really ...
> realy ... really (well, you get the point) secure.
>
> Just give a warning that current ssh implementation is not tha
I support the addition of ssh, *even* with a weak random.
The problem is, without ssh ... I would have to resort to telnet.
I have to manage/operate/update our GNU/hurd through network
and I am assuming many are in the same situation.
"Weak" ssh is better than telnet. Having a minimal clothes is
be
6 matches
Mail list logo
