Re: Time for FTP to die

2001-02-28 Thread Kevin D. Clark
[EMAIL PROTECTED] writes: > Personally, I think a lot of this is moot. Using cleartext FTP for > authenticated access over the public 'net is a really unnecessary risk these > days. Tod said in his original post: : Without the requirement for windows clients I'd just use scp and : rsync. Oh

Re: Time for FTP to die (aka Alternatives to ftp daemon?)

2001-02-27 Thread Benjamin Scott
On Tue, 27 Feb 2001, Tod Hagan wrote: > Is there a daemon I can run besides ftp which has clients which run on > Windows and Macs to allow password protected access for uploading? This > isn't for anonymous uploads. For authenticated file transfers on public networks, I recommend against plain

Re: Time for FTP to die

2001-02-27 Thread Benjamin Scott
On Tue, 27 Feb 2001, Kevin D. Clark wrote: >>> In fact, some implementations are quite secure, and are always >>> improving. >> >> Name one. > > If you can't find one, you shouldn't be running a publicly accessible > ftp server. Well, can you name one? :-) Just about every popular, Open

Re: Time for FTP to die (aka Alternatives to ftp daemon?)

2001-02-27 Thread Kenneth E. Lussier
Tod Hagan wrote: > > Is there a daemon I can run besides ftp which has clients which run on > Windows and Macs to allow password protected access for uploading? > This isn't for anonymous uploads. SSH. > Without the requirement for windows clients I'd just use scp and > rsync. Oh, for Windows a

Re: Time for FTP to die (aka Alternatives to ftp daemon?)

2001-02-27 Thread Derek Martin
On Tue, 27 Feb 2001, Kevin D. Clark wrote: > > [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes: > > > Is there a daemon I can run besides ftp which has clients which run on > > Windows and Macs to allow password protected access for uploading? > > This isn't for anonymous uploads. > ... > > I hate ftp. The design of

Re: Time for FTP to die (aka Alternatives to ftp daemon?)

2001-02-27 Thread Peter Cavender
>Is there a daemon I can run besides ftp which has clients which run on >Windows and Macs to allow password protected access for uploading? Why not samba for Win, and netatalk for Macs? I have a server here in the office that has a globally shared diretory: Samba, AppleShare, NFS, FTP, HTTP.

Re: Time for FTP to die

2001-02-27 Thread Kevin D. Clark
[EMAIL PROTECTED] writes: > On Tue, Feb 27, 2001 at 05:25:04PM -0500, Kevin D. Clark wrote: > >> In fact, some implementations are quite secure, and are always > >> improving. > > Name one. If you can't find one, you shouldn't be running a publicly accessible ftp server. And if you aren't p

Re: Time for FTP to die

2001-02-27 Thread Tod Hagan
On Tue, Feb 27, 2001 at 05:25:04PM -0500, Kevin D. Clark wrote: > In fact, some implementations are quite secure, and are always > improving. Name one. -- Tod Hagan Campton, NH [EMAIL PROTECTED] ** To unsubscribe from this list, send ma

Re: Time for FTP to die (aka Alternatives to ftp daemon?)

2001-02-27 Thread Kevin D. Clark
[EMAIL PROTECTED] writes: > Is there a daemon I can run besides ftp which has clients which run on > Windows and Macs to allow password protected access for uploading? > This isn't for anonymous uploads. ... > I hate ftp. The design of the protocol itself is OLD, from the early > 70s -- that's o

Time for FTP to die (aka Alternatives to ftp daemon?)

2001-02-27 Thread Tod Hagan
Is there a daemon I can run besides ftp which has clients which run on Windows and Macs to allow password protected access for uploading? This isn't for anonymous uploads. Without the requirement for windows clients I'd just use scp and rsync. Oh, for Windows and Mac rsync clients. Without the r