From owner-freebsd-current@FreeBSD.ORG Thu Dec 16 05:55:06 2004 Return-Path: Delivered-To: freebsd-current@freebsd.org Received: from mx1.FreeBSD.org (mx1.freebsd.org [216.136.204.125]) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 18CCC16A4CE for ; Thu, 16 Dec 2004 05:55:06 +0000 (GMT) Received: from alpha.siliconlandmark.com (alpha.siliconlandmark.com [209.69.98.4]) by mx1.FreeBSD.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id A603443D31 for ; Thu, 16 Dec 2004 05:55:05 +0000 (GMT) (envelope-from andy@siliconlandmark.com) Received: from alpha.siliconlandmark.com (andy@localhost [127.0.0.1]) iBG5t3aI072615; Thu, 16 Dec 2004 00:55:03 -0500 (EST) (envelope-from andy@siliconlandmark.com) Received: from localhost (andy@localhost)iBG5t3Ys072612; Thu, 16 Dec 2004 00:55:03 -0500 (EST) (envelope-from andy@siliconlandmark.com) X-Authentication-Warning: alpha.siliconlandmark.com: andy owned process doing -bs Date: Thu, 16 Dec 2004 00:55:03 -0500 (EST) From: Andre Guibert de Bruet To: Matthias Andree In-Reply-To: <20041216001335.X19917@alpha.siliconlandmark.com> Message-ID: <20041216004526.N19917@alpha.siliconlandmark.com> References: <44115.1103109518@critter.freebsd.dk> <20041215095337.T19917@alpha.siliconlandmark.com> <20041216001335.X19917@alpha.siliconlandmark.com> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII; format=flowed X-MailScanner-Information: Please contact the ISP for more information X-MailScanner: Found to be clean cc: current@freebsd.org Subject: Re: Networked single-user recovery (Was: Re: Background fsck is broken) X-BeenThere: freebsd-current@freebsd.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.1 Precedence: list List-Id: Discussions about the use of FreeBSD-current List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Thu, 16 Dec 2004 05:55:06 -0000 (Replying to myself) On Thu, 16 Dec 2004, Andre Guibert de Bruet wrote: > Dropbear appears to be put together from many pieces, all of which seem to > carry a BSD-compatible license (IANAL etc etc). It is currently in ports > (security/dropbear) and the built, stripped binary appear to "only" be 53K > smaller than the OpenSSH one. Because an sshd is a network daemon, security > is of course a concern -- Is the 53K of saved space in /rescue (But > additional space somewhere else for the convert and key utilities) worth the > hassles of tracking upstream distributions of two seperate sshds? I > personally tend to think not, but I'm open for comments on this one. Well, let me correct the size statement before someone else does. It would help if I actually compared the size of static versions of these files! It's late... Andy | Andre Guibert de Bruet | Enterprise Software Consultant > | Silicon Landmark, LLC. | http://siliconlandmark.com/ >