| 1 |
Well, something (ssh?) installed sftp on both of my boxes... anything |
| 2 |
wrong with using that? It's secure and seems to work just fine. What do |
| 3 |
pureftp and proftp offer that sftp doesn't? |
| 4 |
|
| 5 |
b |
| 6 |
|
| 7 |
|
| 8 |
Andrea Ferraris wrote: |
| 9 |
>>From: "Benjamin Coles" <sj7trunks@g.o> |
| 10 |
> |
| 11 |
> |
| 12 |
>>I second proftpd... most people like to complain and say ftp is a |
| 13 |
>>unsecure protocol because it's not ssl. Well news to the people that |
| 14 |
>>don't know, proftpd supports ssl which works wonders on system=) |
| 15 |
> |
| 16 |
> |
| 17 |
> Thx. Good to know. |
| 18 |
> |
| 19 |
> I don't know wich are the details and I have very litle experience with |
| 20 |
> proftpd and none with pure-ftpd, but for curiosity I went to pure-ftpd |
| 21 |
> site and I saw: |
| 22 |
> |
| 23 |
> "Transmission of cleartext passwords and commands can be avoided : |
| 24 |
> Pure-FTPd has optional support for an SSL/TLS encryption layer using |
| 25 |
> the OpenSSL library. " |
| 26 |
> |
| 27 |
> I also saw that Pure-FTP doesn't have any records of security vulnerability, |
| 28 |
> instead it seems that in the past there was compromised system due to |
| 29 |
> proftpd security bugs. |
| 30 |
> |
| 31 |
> Regards, |
| 32 |
> Andrea |
| 33 |
> |
Archives