From owner-freebsd-security@freebsd.org Tue Jan 31 12:25:16 2017 Return-Path: Delivered-To: freebsd-security@mailman.ysv.freebsd.org Received: from mx1.freebsd.org (mx1.freebsd.org [IPv6:2001:1900:2254:206a::19:1]) by mailman.ysv.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 50544CC9D00 for ; Tue, 31 Jan 2017 12:25:16 +0000 (UTC) (envelope-from des@des.no) Received: from smtp.des.no (smtp.des.no [194.63.250.102]) by mx1.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 176561A2C for ; Tue, 31 Jan 2017 12:25:15 +0000 (UTC) (envelope-from des@des.no) Received: from desk.des.no (smtp.des.no [194.63.250.102]) by smtp.des.no (Postfix) with ESMTP id A702EDB66; Tue, 31 Jan 2017 12:25:13 +0000 (UTC) Received: by desk.des.no (Postfix, from userid 1001) id 45E89744F; Tue, 31 Jan 2017 13:24:29 +0100 (CET) From: =?utf-8?Q?Dag-Erling_Sm=C3=B8rgrav?= To: heasley Cc: freebsd-security@freebsd.org Subject: Re: fbsd11 & sshv1 References: <20170127173016.GF12175@shrubbery.net> <867f5c66yr.fsf@desk.des.no> <20170130195226.GD73060@shrubbery.net> Date: Tue, 31 Jan 2017 13:24:29 +0100 In-Reply-To: <20170130195226.GD73060@shrubbery.net> (heasley's message of "Mon, 30 Jan 2017 19:52:26 +0000") Message-ID: <867f5bfmde.fsf@desk.des.no> User-Agent: Gnus/5.13 (Gnus v5.13) Emacs/25.1 (berkeley-unix) MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8 Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable X-BeenThere: freebsd-security@freebsd.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.23 Precedence: list List-Id: "Security issues \[members-only posting\]" List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Tue, 31 Jan 2017 12:25:16 -0000 heasley writes: > Dag-Erling Sm=C3=B8rgrav writes: > > FreeBSD 10 supports SSHv1 and will continue to do so. FreeBSD 11 > > and 12 do not, and neither does the openssh-portable port. I'm > > afraid you will have to find some other SSH client. > That is sad; You know what would be even sadder? If the OpenSSH developers had to continue to devote significant resources to maintaining a rat's nest of legacy code so 0.0001% of their users could continue to use an obsolete protocol to connect to obsolete equipment, instead of devoting those same resources to developing new features and improving existing ones. Especially when those users have plenty of alternatives to choose from, including but not limited to security/putty. DES --=20 Dag-Erling Sm=C3=B8rgrav - des@des.no