Articles referencing this project
Comments
[»]
Nobody uses SSH - what?!
by Scott McCrory - Sep 14th 2000 15:03:27
Hate to disagree Jeff, but LOTS of corporations use SSH because of the
support contracts available (we have hundreds of copies running at my
workplace). And while I agree that open-source workers may prefer OpenSSH
for philosophical reasons, don't assume that it works for everyone. SSH is
a fine product...
[reply]
[top]
[»]
Perhaps you are looking for Portable OpenSSH or FreeSSH?
by Robin Whittle - Aug 7th 2001 04:33:43
http://www.openssh.org/
OpenSSH is a FREE version of the SSH protocol suite of network
connectivity tools that increasing numbers of people on the Internet
are coming to rely on. Many users of telnet, rlogin, ftp, and other such
programs might not realize that their password is transmitted across
the Internet unencrypted, but it is. OpenSSH encrypts all traffic
(including passwords) to effectively eliminate eavesdropping,
connection hijacking, and other network-level attacks. Additionally,
OpenSSH provides a myriad of secure tunneling capabilities, as well
as a variety of authentication methods.
OpenSSH is an OpenBSD project and *Portable* OpenSSH covers:
AIX, HP-UX, Irix, Linux, NeXT, SCO, SNI/Reliant Unix, Solaris,
Digital Unix/Tru64/OSF, MacOS X, Cygwin and more . . .
http://www.openssh.org/portable.html
There is a fab Windows SSH client called PuTTY which does
excellent terminal emulation and works perfectly with
Midnight Commander. Also Windows GUI front-ends for
the SSH file transfer program.
Likewise SSH clients and servers, for Mac, PalmOS, Java . . .
MSDOS, Windows CE, BEOS, VMS, RISCOS . . .
http://www.freessh.org/other.html
Apparently ownership of the trademark "SSH" is in dispute,
so not every station in the SSH firmament will help you find
the others.
- Robin
[reply]
[top]
[»]
Re: Problems with 1.X
by jeff covey - Jul 31st 2000 13:29:58
approximately no one uses ssh2. try openssh
instead.
--
vs lbh pna ernq guvf, lbh'er n trrx.
[reply]
[top]
[»]
Problems with 1.X
by Freek - Jul 31st 2000 11:55:52
I just tried the 2.X series (2.0.13) and I can't connect to my university
(they're using 1.X) claiming "Illegal Protoco Version", although
I edited the /etc/ssh2/ssh2_config allowing ssh1 conns and was using
./configure options to ensure compatibility.
So I will downgrade, what a shame.
[reply]
[top]
[»]
Emacs SSH mode
by floop - Jul 22nd 2000 22:30:42
You can find ssh.el and much more at
http://www.anc.ed.ac.uk/~stephen/emacs/ell.html
[reply]
[top]
[»]
SSH in emacs?
by starselbrg - Mar 6th 2000 19:34:27
Has anyone found a way to use ssh through emacs to edit remote files (more
specifically using scp)? This would be very usefull.
[reply]
[top]
[»]
ssh1 buffer overflow vulnerability
by Daniel Morrison - Aug 11th 1999 14:27:16
Soren Harward's comments regarding the buffer overflow in ssh1 and the
attack on rootshell.com are INCORRECT. If you read rootshell.com, you will
see:
"PLEASE REMEMBER, ROOTSHELL HAS NEVER STATED THAT THE BREAK-IN WE HAD
WAS FROM A SECURITY HOLE IN SSH. "
Additionally, the buffer overflow that was found in ssh-1.2.26 is very
difficult to exploit, and only possible if ssh was compliled with
'--with-kerberos5', which is NOT the default. Please see the
official announcement. Finally, freshmeat lists ssh-1.2.27 as the
latest version, and the buffer overflow has been fixed. There is no need
to upgrade to ssh version2. I am sticking with ssh1 due to the more
restrictive licensing present in ssh2 (until the free version is released).
[reply]
[top]
[»]
ssh2 / ssh1 compatibility
by soren harward - May 24th 1999 14:09:55
ssh1 has a well-known buffer-overflow problem -- it's what someone used to
crack rootshell.com last year. ssh2 is a complete, ground-up rewrite of
ssh which doesn't have the security hole -- plus it's being maintained and
ssh1 isn't. You should upgrade to 2 unless you have an absolute reason not
to -- as of 2.0.13, non-passworded authentication (like hostkey-only auth)
has been implemented.
[reply]
[top]
|
