Skip site navigation (1)Skip section navigation (2)
Date:      Wed, 27 Mar 2002 11:01:00 -0500
From:      Tom Rhodes <darklogik@pittgoth.com>
To:        Michael Lucas <mwlucas@blackhelicopters.org>
Cc:        dan@tangledhelix.com, freebsd-security@FreeBSD.ORG
Subject:   Re: It's time for those 2048-, 3072-, and 4096-bit keys?
Message-ID:  <20020327110100.6d638389.darklogik@pittgoth.com>
In-Reply-To: <20020327074236.B86929@blackhelicopters.org>
References:  <20020326185714.F22539@mail.webmonster.de> <20020326182003.F15545-100000@patrocles.silby.com> <20020326181634.A919@lothlorien.tangledhelix.net> <20020327074236.B86929@blackhelicopters.org>

next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
--=.:kAuWAFj2)lPva
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit

On Wed, 27 Mar 2002 07:42:36 -0500
Michael Lucas <mwlucas@blackhelicopters.org> wrote:

> On Tue, Mar 26, 2002 at 06:16:34PM -0500, Dan Lowe wrote:
> > Previously, Mike Silbersack wrote:
> > > 
> > > Yes, upgrading clients to v2 would be best.  However, I don't
> > > think that locking out v1 users would be the best way to achieve
> > > that.  The most likely result of doing so would be people
> > > falling back to telnet.
> > 
> > On a system where security is of any concern whatsoever, why would
> > telnet be available in the first place?
> 
> I just dealt with a group of "senior" admins here in Detroit who
> weren't familiar with the problems of telneting to their Ciscos.
> Ethereal was quite the shock to them.  :-)
> 
> It's taken us years to basically scrub telnet off the map, and it's
> still not gone.  SSHv1 is far better than telnet, and there are any
> number of v1 clients still out there.  Please don't make it any
> harder than it absolutely has to be.
> 
> Perhaps a comment in the file, "we recommend using v2 whenever
> possible", so people stumble across it frequently even if they don't
> bother reading the docs?

How about a nice addition to the ssh manual pages just because I do
not think they describe things well enough.  For instance, when I
first started using scp(1), I fought like hell before I figured it
out.  I do not feel the manual page had a clear description of how
to use scp(1).  It did, however, cover the options well...  I think
that it should describe how to use protocol 2, I also think it should
point you to a reference of the use options.

Opinions?
> 
> ==ml
> 
> -- 
> Michael Lucas		mwlucas@FreeBSD.org, mwlucas@BlackHelicopters.org
> my FreeBSD column: http://www.oreillynet.com/pub/q/Big_Scary_Daemons
> 
> http://www.blackhelicopters.org/~mwlucas/
> 
> To Unsubscribe: send mail to majordomo@FreeBSD.org
> with "unsubscribe freebsd-security" in the body of the message
> 


-- 
Tom (Darklogik) Rhodes
www.FreeBSD.org  -The Power To Serve
www.Pittgoth.com -Pittgoth Discussion Portal
trhodes@ {Pittgoth.com, FreeBSD.org}

--=.:kAuWAFj2)lPva
Content-Type: application/pgp-signature

-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: GnuPG v1.0.6 (FreeBSD)

iD8DBQE8oezAwPmgiRuevUMRAhLZAKCL7MrD6ClvW+dX4qASoLCLEIHY3gCg6p62
KJvApIOtEXYMH/ETFFOyn9M=
=A+qb
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----

--=.:kAuWAFj2)lPva--


To Unsubscribe: send mail to majordomo@FreeBSD.org
with "unsubscribe freebsd-security" in the body of the message




Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?20020327110100.6d638389.darklogik>