3 ms·

... or FTPS (which is different from SFTP) !

• laumars 9y ago
  Different but still worse than SFTP: FTPS suffers from all the same problems as FTP (lack of definitive standard for FTP commands nor their returns, poor client server relationship due to the data port being a callback, no standard for native compression, etc) bar the clear text problem* . But ironically the encryption then creates a new issue with clients behind NATing due to the aforementioned lack of client/server distinction. I don't think there is really much excuse not to run SFTP instead of FTP(S) given that most clients already support it. Or use one of the numerous other sharing / transfer protocols available to us now. * unless you misconfigure FTPS that is
  • mjevans 9y ago
    FTPS lets you (easily) use entirely virtual (custom to the FTPS server) users. SFTP requires the use 'real' users (maybe not with fancy daemon software or a headache of PAM rules).
    • laumars 9y ago
      ...or virtual machines, containers, or even just defining valid groups in sshd_config. There is a whole multitude of ways of separating out SFTP users, it's really not a hard job to do. Equally a lot of Linux FTP daemons defaults to using /etc/passwd users too. So What you're describing is a configuration detail the administrator needs to be aware of regardless of what transfer server they set up. In that regard FTP is no different from SFTP (or vise versa)