From owner-freebsd-stable@freebsd.org Wed Apr 7 17:53:36 2021 Return-Path: Delivered-To: freebsd-stable@mailman.nyi.freebsd.org Received: from mx1.freebsd.org (mx1.freebsd.org [IPv6:2610:1c1:1:606c::19:1]) by mailman.nyi.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 2A4AE5BF1EE for ; Wed, 7 Apr 2021 17:53:36 +0000 (UTC) (envelope-from asomers@gmail.com) Received: from mail-oi1-f174.google.com (mail-oi1-f174.google.com [209.85.167.174]) (using TLSv1.3 with cipher TLS_AES_128_GCM_SHA256 (128/128 bits) key-exchange X25519 server-signature RSA-PSS (4096 bits) server-digest SHA256 client-signature RSA-PSS (2048 bits) client-digest SHA256) (Client CN "smtp.gmail.com", Issuer "GTS CA 1O1" (verified OK)) by mx1.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 4FFsSw0fKGz4V2G; Wed, 7 Apr 2021 17:53:35 +0000 (UTC) (envelope-from asomers@gmail.com) Received: by mail-oi1-f174.google.com with SMTP id d12so19611020oiw.12; Wed, 07 Apr 2021 10:53:35 -0700 (PDT) X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=1e100.net; s=20161025; h=x-gm-message-state:mime-version:references:in-reply-to:from:date :message-id:subject:to:cc; bh=KXEZisIFKFcu83JtQobPqCBDyQWKtSDFBHJFh9XHx2c=; b=hMkD+HQx2HhXPq4q5VkOnq7mwsc44SIzljA8ZN/FuhuDjJSVlLs2RK+wCkOS5A5+M2 G26atT9PbaI3P/9wTA1cBAIBIpyc8f+CSJ0/27Fl9u6hYadEaWUpE9zuie1zlU/gMB+7 9/j9o+lUQu71m16ENkJXYp6YXUyE7devf5xcXnAxlf5thW6YkTW/MEQ1cSr+E8sssObY 0rZes2Fhk+MMjvmxlg/rm2jys+xWX0h3XvrWdxb3QtIqqrF2msfwqq7YRWUU2aCapEGB QZHeKSv6bjyWeHwtjG8dW+05QyRZYABGlAp6UT2BhucGvnpIDub2OWLhqD+vnzy9r8Al 3IcA== X-Gm-Message-State: AOAM5306VFKFZKvC8lwYkShfZXRfIzozS5icr21KZ/BaZSJEoQhtoGDN KLZ3ILNm7HppCeck4k116fe0be3hS5sNPP536LOmyjLCq24= X-Google-Smtp-Source: ABdhPJyJDas4ol+Abol1ATgvvCTAcdazQMvpQzcQL4PrQ6H9TiRa767Hqs5bCFuKWGtHi8F+J3GkUO3cQjKWyzoO+LQ= X-Received: by 2002:aca:3046:: with SMTP id w67mr3020910oiw.57.1617818014754; Wed, 07 Apr 2021 10:53:34 -0700 (PDT) MIME-Version: 1.0 References: <410c8c8764da1dd53b77d07befe91c41@bsdforge.com> In-Reply-To: <410c8c8764da1dd53b77d07befe91c41@bsdforge.com> From: Alan Somers Date: Wed, 7 Apr 2021 11:53:23 -0600 Message-ID: Subject: Re: Deprecating base system ftpd? To: Chris Cc: Warner Losh , Ed Maste , freebsd-stable stable X-Rspamd-Queue-Id: 4FFsSw0fKGz4V2G X-Spamd-Bar: ---- Authentication-Results: mx1.freebsd.org; none X-Spamd-Result: default: False [-4.00 / 15.00]; REPLY(-4.00)[] Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8" X-Content-Filtered-By: Mailman/MimeDel 2.1.34 X-BeenThere: freebsd-stable@freebsd.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.34 Precedence: list List-Id: Production branch of FreeBSD source code List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Wed, 07 Apr 2021 17:53:36 -0000 On Tue, Apr 6, 2021 at 1:25 PM Chris wrote: > On 2021-04-03 13:45, Warner Losh wrote: > > On Sat, Apr 3, 2021 at 2:40 PM Ed Maste wrote: > > > >> I propose deprecating the ftpd currently included in the base system > >> before FreeBSD 14, and opened review D26447 > >> (https://reviews.freebsd.org/D26447) to add a notice to the man page. > >> I had originally planned to try to do this before 13.0, but it dropped > >> off my list. FTP is not nearly as relevant now as it once was, and it > >> had a security vulnerability that secteam had to address. > I *strongly* object. MacOS also did this. Which made me discover that I > could simply copy my already built FreeBSD version over to all my MacOS > laptops and now enjoy an even better version than had previously existed. > This fact has made my use and need for FreeBSD' ftp even more important. > It has also made FreeBSD more popular with the Mac folks. > I depend upon ftp(1) && ftpd(8). I have on FreeBSD, for as many years as > FreeBSD has existed. I find the ssh and related ports are probed and > hammered on constantly. Whereas the ftp ports are quite rare by comparison. > So keeping sshd(8) and friends ports closed removes overhead. I have no > difficulty managing ftpd(8) via inet(8) && hosts.allow(5). Ftp && ftpd > are both trivial programs and should not be considered for removal. > If the reason for their suggested removal is "development overhead". > Please allow me to maintain both. I will happily assume full > responsibility for them. > > Thank you for listening. :-) > Great! Even though they work well, they haven't seen a lot of TLC. What really worries me most is that ftpd has zero test coverage. It would be great to fix that, and not too hard. You could start be adapting the existing tests in libexec/tftpd/tests/ . Capscium support would be nice, too. -Alan