From owner-freebsd-questions Wed May 26 8: 0:32 1999 Delivered-To: freebsd-questions@freebsd.org Received: from dazed.slacker.com (dazed.slacker.com [208.15.208.76]) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with SMTP id E46E814C1B for ; Wed, 26 May 1999 08:00:05 -0700 (PDT) (envelope-from fbsdlist@dazed.slacker.com) Received: (qmail 94127 invoked by uid 1012); 26 May 1999 15:00:03 -0000 Date: Wed, 26 May 1999 10:00:03 -0500 From: FreeBSD Lists Archive To: questions@freebsd.org Subject: Re: Secure Shell Message-ID: <19990526100003.A93790@dazed.slacker.com> References: <3744671C.52AA65E5@zumnet.com.br> <19990520203119.MJDK7869945.mta1-rme@wocker> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii X-Mailer: Mutt 0.95i In-Reply-To: <19990520203119.MJDK7869945.mta1-rme@wocker>; from Dan Langille on Fri, May 21, 1999 at 08:28:59AM +1200 X-Operating-System: FreeBSD 3.1-STABLE i386 X-Distributed: Join the Effort! http://www.distributed.net Sender: owner-freebsd-questions@FreeBSD.ORG Precedence: bulk X-Loop: FreeBSD.ORG On 21-May-1999, Dan Langille wrote: > Also, I've been told that ssh2 is not for most people and to only use > ssh2 if someone tells you that you need it. Shouldn't most people be > using ssh not ssh2? And why? Although there are some weird quirks relating to ssh2 <--> ssh1 interoperability, it's nothing critical at all and mainly just mean that you have to change some habits if you want things to go smoothly. The reason you hear so much grumbling and complaint about ssh2 is not due to technical considerations but is in fact because the license for ssh2 is *significantly* more restricted than the ssh1 license which limits many people from being able to legally deploy the product. The old ssh1 license reads (in part): (b) You may use the program for non-commercial purposes only, meaning that the program must not be sold commercially as a separate product, as part of a bigger product or project, or otherwise used for financial gain without a separate license. Please see Section 2, Restrictions, for more details. ... Companies are permitted to use this program as long as it is not used for revenue-generating purposes. For example, an Internet service provider is allowed to install this program on their systems and permit clients to use SSH to connect; however, actively distributing SSH to clients for the purpose of providing added value requires separate licensing. The new ssh2 license (ftp://ftp.cs.hut.fi/pub/ssh/LICENSING.SSH2) modifies this last bit to the more restrictive: Uses not considered as NON-COMMERCIAL USE include, but are not limited to: a) any use where commercial activity is involved and where the use in any way, directly or indirectly, aims at monetary or other commercial benefit, b) any use that takes place in commercial, governmental, military, or similar organizations and where a salary or similar monetary compensation is paid, unless the use can be considered to be EDUCATIONAL USE or is purely for charity. By barring deployment in commercial environments, they've pretty much removed any chance of widespread acceptance when a free (and some would argue, equally secure) alternative exists. -- ________________________________________________________________________ |David McNett |To ensure privacy and data integrity this message has| |nugget@slacker.com|been encrypted using dual rounds of ROT-13 encryption| |Birmingham, AL USA|Please encrypt all important correspondence with PGP!| To Unsubscribe: send mail to majordomo@FreeBSD.org with "unsubscribe freebsd-questions" in the body of the message