From owner-freebsd-questions@FreeBSD.ORG  Thu May 28 11:13:25 2009
Return-Path: <owner-freebsd-questions@FreeBSD.ORG>
Delivered-To: freebsd-questions@freebsd.org
Received: from mx1.freebsd.org (mx1.freebsd.org [IPv6:2001:4f8:fff6::34])
	by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 0EAEA106567F
	for <freebsd-questions@freebsd.org>;
	Thu, 28 May 2009 11:13:25 +0000 (UTC)
	(envelope-from wojtek@wojtek.tensor.gdynia.pl)
Received: from wojtek.tensor.gdynia.pl (wojtek.tensor.gdynia.pl
	[IPv6:2001:4070:101:2::1])
	by mx1.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 3D7608FC1E
	for <freebsd-questions@freebsd.org>;
	Thu, 28 May 2009 11:13:23 +0000 (UTC)
	(envelope-from wojtek@wojtek.tensor.gdynia.pl)
Received: from wojtek.tensor.gdynia.pl (localhost [IPv6:::1])
	by wojtek.tensor.gdynia.pl (8.14.3/8.14.3) with ESMTP id n4SBDBYl059454;
	Thu, 28 May 2009 13:13:11 +0200 (CEST)
	(envelope-from wojtek@wojtek.tensor.gdynia.pl)
Received: from localhost (wojtek@localhost)
	by wojtek.tensor.gdynia.pl (8.14.3/8.14.3/Submit) with ESMTP id
	n4SBDBX1059451; Thu, 28 May 2009 13:13:11 +0200 (CEST)
	(envelope-from wojtek@wojtek.tensor.gdynia.pl)
Date: Thu, 28 May 2009 13:13:11 +0200 (CEST)
From: Wojciech Puchar <wojtek@wojtek.tensor.gdynia.pl>
To: utisoft@gmail.com
In-Reply-To: <b79ecaef0905280405w1cfa3e6en59ab1a18e20658bf@mail.gmail.com>
Message-ID: <alpine.BSF.2.00.0905281310570.59311@wojtek.tensor.gdynia.pl>
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>
User-Agent: Alpine 2.00 (BSF 1167 2008-08-23)
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII; format=flowed
Cc: Olivier Nicole <on@cs.ait.ac.th>, freebsd-questions@freebsd.org
Subject: Re: Remotely edit user disk quota
X-BeenThere: freebsd-questions@freebsd.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.5
Precedence: list
List-Id: User questions <freebsd-questions.freebsd.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-questions>, 
	<mailto:freebsd-questions-request@freebsd.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <http://lists.freebsd.org/pipermail/freebsd-questions>
List-Post: <mailto:freebsd-questions@freebsd.org>
List-Help: <mailto:freebsd-questions-request@freebsd.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-questions>, 
	<mailto:freebsd-questions-request@freebsd.org?subject=subscribe>
X-List-Received-Date: Thu, 28 May 2009 11:13:25 -0000

> 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.