Re: Bothersome public key SCP implementations..
From: Jon Niehof (jniehof_at_bu.edu)
Date: 05/06/05
- Previous message: daniel.engelsen_at_caremark.com: "remote ssh for root"
- In reply to: theta_at_netwalk.com: "Bothersome public key SCP implementations.."
- Next in thread: Miller, Matthew: "RE: Bothersome public key SCP implementations.."
- Messages sorted by: [ date ] [ thread ] [ subject ] [ author ] [ attachment ]
Date: Fri, 6 May 2005 12:52:01 -0400 (EDT) To: secureshell@securityfocus.com
theta@netwalk.com said:
> The free, open-source
> implementations that I have run across (FileZilla, WinSCP) seem to use the
> same PuTTY codebase, which doesn't have native support for public key
> exchange, and relies on a secondary PuTTY utility (pageant) for the
> exchange of keys.
When last I used PuTTY regularly, pageant was only required for persistent
storage of unlocked keys. PuTTY itself allowed you to associate a key with
a saved connection configuration, and plink allowed specification of a
keyfile on the command line (-i option?).
See:
http://the.earth.li/~sgtatham/putty/0.58/htmldoc/Chapter8.html
in particular the links at the bottom.
- Previous message: daniel.engelsen_at_caremark.com: "remote ssh for root"
- In reply to: theta_at_netwalk.com: "Bothersome public key SCP implementations.."
- Next in thread: Miller, Matthew: "RE: Bothersome public key SCP implementations.."
- Messages sorted by: [ date ] [ thread ] [ subject ] [ author ] [ attachment ]
Relevant Pages
|