begin risky.vbs
<20061023225416.7b44553e@ed-desktop>,
ed <ed@xxxxxxxxxxx> writes:
> On 23 Oct 2006 13:55:25 -0700
>
> and so much just cant be done ootb. de ja vu, but 2 years ago.
>
> why, for crying out load doesnt ms just put ssh client/server in,
> they have telnet daemon, so why not ssh? it's been around for ages.
What use is ssh for accessing Windows systems? None. You could use it
to add better security and encryption for tunneling remote desktop I
presume if it could be made to work.
ssh is one of the coolest apps ever written. Trouble is it just
doesn't fit into the MS way of doing things. Hence I doubt MS will
ever see a need to offer it. Being able to run apps remotely without
paying the MS tax is just a no no. Using a Windows box to access other,
non-MS, systems is an even bigger no no.
For *nix systems ssh is an incredible tool. With X tunneling it is
simply superb. Windows just doesn't have the flexibility for a tool
like ssh.
--
Security is one of those funny things. You can talk about being "more"
secure, but there's no such thing. A vulnerability is a vulnerability, and
even one makes you just as insecure as anyone else. Security is a binary
condition, either you are or you aren't. - Funkenbusch 1 Oct 2006
|
|
