Re: The yearly FTP rant (Was: Re: Passive FTP and NAT/PAT with PIX and Serv-U)

["Marcus J. Ranum" <mjr () nfr com>]

Matt Curtin wrote:
> Does sftp(1) do what you're looking for?

In a simple view, yes. It's a replacement for ftp, and it's better than
ftp. That's a good thing.

It's still not a Very Good Thing - what we _really_ need is security
procotol unification. Why do we have sftp, ssh, ssl, etc, etc - what
the Internet really needs is a decent set of tools built atop a common
security protocol including common authorization, common encryption,
common authentication, etc. That way there's one place to upgrade and
one place to maintain code. Right now we're doing the right thing but
we're going about it the wrong way.

mjr.

_______________________________________________
firewall-wizards mailing list
firewall-wizards () nfr com
http://list.nfr.com/mailman/listinfo/firewall-wizards