Date: Thu, 28 May 2009 13:13:11 +0200 (CEST) From: Wojciech Puchar <wojtek@wojtek.tensor.gdynia.pl> To: utisoft@gmail.com Cc: Olivier Nicole <on@cs.ait.ac.th>, freebsd-questions@freebsd.org Subject: Re: Remotely edit user disk quota Message-ID: <alpine.BSF.2.00.0905281310570.59311@wojtek.tensor.gdynia.pl> In-Reply-To: <b79ecaef0905280405w1cfa3e6en59ab1a18e20658bf@mail.gmail.com> References: <200905281030.n4SAUXdA046386@banyan.cs.ait.ac.th> <alpine.BSF.2.00.0905281234430.59126@wojtek.tensor.gdynia.pl> <200905281041.n4SAfTHw046546@banyan.cs.ait.ac.th> <b79ecaef0905280352k600e2a79mef2a6b3efe41f0a3@mail.gmail.com> <alpine.BSF.2.00.0905281301180.59311@wojtek.tensor.gdynia.pl> <b79ecaef0905280405w1cfa3e6en59ab1a18e20658bf@mail.gmail.com>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
> Due to these serious problems rlogin was rarely used across untrusted networks Good you finally pointed out the most important thing "rlogin/rsh is insecure across untrusted network" This is QUITE a difference between this and "rsh is insecure. period" rsh is as secure as the communication channel. If it can be considered secure - DO USE rsh, because it's fastest as it doesn't have any encryption overhead.
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?alpine.BSF.2.00.0905281310570.59311>