cryptoanarchy.wiki

Arise, you have nothing to lose but your barbed wire fences!

1996-09-27 - Re: ssh - How widely used?

Header Data

From: Adam Shostack <adam@homeport.org>
To: perry@piermont.com
Message Hash: e72b22aca90d75ae8d44d13fc085b3cf2da68cd76cd04dc204e402316224527b
Message ID: <199609271823.NAA08790@homeport.org>
Reply To: <199609271552.LAA08679@jekyll.piermont.com>
UTC Datetime: 1996-09-27 20:57:42 UTC
Raw Date: Sat, 28 Sep 1996 04:57:42 +0800

Raw message

From: Adam Shostack <adam@homeport.org>
Date: Sat, 28 Sep 1996 04:57:42 +0800
To: perry@piermont.com
Subject: Re: ssh - How widely used?
In-Reply-To: <199609271552.LAA08679@jekyll.piermont.com>
Message-ID: <199609271823.NAA08790@homeport.org>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text


Actually, I recommend systems based on threat and comfort.  If the
system is protected (ie, behind a firewall, on a compartmentalized
network), I use ssh, no problem.  I use ssh even where I'm not
comfortable with it because I'm more comfortable with it than with the
alternatives, but there are times when the "No remote access" option
is more comfortable than ssh.

Adam

Perry E. Metzger wrote:

| Chad Dougherty writes:
| >  > 	Despite all this, I use it, like it, and recomend it for use
| >  > in systems not likely to come under attack by professionals.
| > 
| > Why do you say "not likely to come under attack by professionals"?
| > Have you found security holes in it?
| 
| Security professionals do not recommend use of systems they feel less
| than perfectly comfortable with whether or not they know of specific
| holes.



-- 
"It is seldom that liberty of any kind is lost all at once."
					               -Hume

Thread