Re: User SFTP Directory under win2000 server

From: Nico Kadel-Garcia (nkadel@bellatlantic.net)
Date: 04/23/02 

From: "Nico Kadel-Garcia" <nkadel@bellatlantic.net>
Date: Tue, 23 Apr 2002 03:21:19 GMT

"Oeyvind Pedersen" <abuse@captech.no> wrote in message
news:mu06cuk9k7k728pe6kiccm248jqtjtnfmo@4ax.com...
> Den Sat, 20 Apr 2002 02:19:50 GMT, tastet "Nico Kadel-Garcia"
> <nkadel@bellatlantic.net>:
> >"Oeyvind Pedersen" <abuse@captech.no> wrote in message
> >news:077vbug8kl9b1u0335e34ts2fa66rs7rci@4ax.com...
> >> >
> >> >F-Secure has produced poor, Micro$oft quality, feature over-laden and
> >badly
> >> >built products for several years now. If you want commercial grade
> >support,
> >> >go to www.vandyke.com or consider talking directly to www.ssh.com,
since
> >> >they apparently *wrote* the stuff that F-Secure repackages and screws
up.
> >>
> >> Funny you should say that, since F-Secure SSH Client for windows
version
> >> 4.3 has yet to crash on any of my systems. While the SSH Client version
> >> 5.0 and 5.1 seem to run into trouble from time to time. I also think
the
> >> SFTP interface of version 4.3 is far superior to version 5.x.
> >>
> >> And guess which company made what versions?
> >
> >Try running the *servers*.
>
> So, in what way is the F-Secure server version "repackaged and screwed
> up". I have tried the F-Secure SSH server, and it worked just fine here.
> Can you tell us what problems you experienced with the F-Secure version
> that was not a problem with the SSH.com's version?

ssh.com wrote the original SSH. F-Secure software support has been
absolutely pitiful. And certain design plans, such as the use of the same
port for ssh1 and ssh2 with the "install ssh1, then ssh2, you can't do the
reverse", combined with that pitiful excuse for a chroot cage implementation
one or the other company developed for the ssh 3 release should have been
buried with a steak through its liver for having too much gall.

The Makefiles were horrid, the configure scripts were pitiful, and their
inability and unwillingnesss to accomodate other OS's or even discuss the
concept of aftermarket patches (such as logging the comment field of
authorized_keys for shared account access tracking) add up to truly horrid
software management, especially when the customer has paid for a 10,000 user
license.

> >The clients for Windows have such poor terminal
> >emulation that I've never considered them usable. And I've never had
> >SecureCRT crash, in several yeaars of use and several versions of the
> >software.
>
> I don't have any need for advanced terminal emulation, so VT100 and ANSI
> works fine for me. As for crashing, this was never a issue with the
> clients that F-Secure made from scratch. (And is not a big issue with
> the 5.x clients since version 5.1 either.)

Their VT100 and ANSI are quite poor. Dig up and run the old "vttest"
software for a living demonstration of how many things they got wrong in the
VT100 spec. And oh, my ghu, the VT52! G-a-a-a-a-c-k!

Relevant Pages

  • RE: Commentary on the seven words
    ... When I was an operating systems programmer we all too often forgot that the Operating system existed to support the application, not the other way around. ... A Because the application that we run uses a telnet client that doesn't support ssh - and that's why I can't run ssh on this system. ... I administrate one system that has 128 clients on it and it's ...
    (RedHat)
  • OpenSSH 3.7.1p2 With NIS+ Password Authentication Problem
    ... > only windows SSH clients (I've tried SecureCRT and SSH.com's SSH ... > authentication, it works, but it asks me TWICE ... Your Windows clients are using password authentication. ... But if you run NIS+ at security level 2 the user ...
    (SunManagers)
  • RE: Commentary on the seven words
    ... I wrote in with a complaint that Linux will allow a process (like Tar, ... I administrate one system that has 128 clients ... Why can't I log on to Root from one of those ... want to without the 262 additional levels of complication that ssh ...
    (RedHat)
  • RE: Commentary on the seven words
    ... operating system and utility advice and assistance and there ... I wrote in with a complaint that Linux will allow a process ... I administrate one system that has 128 clients ... want to without the 262 additional levels of complication that ssh ...
    (RedHat)
  • Re: Key Management
    ... that can be built into ssh to manage keys. ... > the private key, is that it should never leave the user's hands. ... > definitely shouldn't be shared via any broadcast system such as LDAP or NIS ... all SSH clients could use them, we might come close to this (but even ...
    (comp.security.ssh)