4 ms·

hmmm... it might be written in Rust, but I'd still rather use an instance of good-old OpenSSH as a suitably configured bastion host. OpenSSH has been battle-te

hmmm... it might be written in Rust, but I'd still rather use an instance of good-old OpenSSH as a suitably configured bastion host. OpenSSH has been battle-tested to death and comes from a good stable (OpenBSD, LibreSSL). I'm very weary indeed of re-implementations of SSH servers.

likeabbas 5y ago
Personally, I’m weary of software written in languages without memory safety that are more likely to have long living exploits only known to certain government authorities.
- VWWHFSfQ 5y ago
  Just because the OP didn't use unsafe {} anywhere in their code doesn't mean it's not used in any dependencies. Just glancing at some of the deps I can already see there is a lot of unsafe usage deep down that are "wrapped" in safe interfaces. Rust is not some kind of silver bullet for safety. It just makes it more explicit. Also, I'm less concerned about the memory safety than the _complete reimplementation of SSH_ from scratch. So give me OpenSSH any day for things that are actually important.
- throwaway2048 5y ago
  Id trust old software written in a memory unsafe language that has a sterling track record over new software written in a safer language that has not much of a track record at all.
  - politician 5y ago
    The Rust authors condemned the world to play their stupid game of semantics when they created the `unsafe` keyword. The feature turns off extra compile time checks. That’s it. It doesn’t mean the program is correct. This program still allows potentially damaging things like `rm -rf /`. So, it’s not data safe. It’s unknown whether it’s secure safe either, since it’s not been audited and it’s still “alpha”.
- RTFM_PLEASE 5y ago
  Please educate yourself. https://www.openbsd.org/security.html https://www.openbsd.org/security.html https://www.openssh.com/history.html https://www.openssh.com/history.html
jffry 5y ago
I think this is fulfilling a slightly different niche - further down in the README it talks specifically about opening a separate connection to the host and recording the session for audit purposes. Which offers a little more than a simple SSH bastion would, unless there are features like this in OpenSSH I'm not aware of.
mlyle 5y ago
> I'm very weary indeed of re-implementations of SSH servers. The security properties of this are a little scary, too: the recommended configuration here has all hosts trusting the bastion, which kind of undoes the point. Pwn the bastion host, and pwn everything. It's trickier, but a decent ssh jumphost requires the user to authenticate to the bastion and the host behind.
- deleted 5y ago
  [deleted]
aaaaaaaaata 5y ago
> OpenSSH has been battle-tested to death So have wet paper bags ;]

likeabbas 5y ago

Personally, I’m weary of software written in languages without memory safety that are more likely to have long living exploits only known to certain government authorities.

VWWHFSfQ 5y ago
Just because the OP didn't use unsafe {} anywhere in their code doesn't mean it's not used in any dependencies. Just glancing at some of the deps I can already see there is a lot of unsafe usage deep down that are "wrapped" in safe interfaces. Rust is not some kind of silver bullet for safety. It just makes it more explicit. Also, I'm less concerned about the memory safety than the _complete reimplementation of SSH_ from scratch. So give me OpenSSH any day for things that are actually important.
throwaway2048 5y ago
Id trust old software written in a memory unsafe language that has a sterling track record over new software written in a safer language that has not much of a track record at all.
- politician 5y ago
  The Rust authors condemned the world to play their stupid game of semantics when they created the `unsafe` keyword. The feature turns off extra compile time checks. That’s it. It doesn’t mean the program is correct. This program still allows potentially damaging things like `rm -rf /`. So, it’s not data safe. It’s unknown whether it’s secure safe either, since it’s not been audited and it’s still “alpha”.
RTFM_PLEASE 5y ago
Please educate yourself. https://www.openbsd.org/security.html https://www.openbsd.org/security.html https://www.openssh.com/history.html https://www.openssh.com/history.html

jffry 5y ago

I think this is fulfilling a slightly different niche - further down in the README it talks specifically about opening a separate connection to the host and recording the session for audit purposes. Which offers a little more than a simple SSH bastion would, unless there are features like this in OpenSSH I'm not aware of.

mlyle 5y ago

> I'm very weary indeed of re-implementations of SSH servers. The security properties of this are a little scary, too: the recommended configuration here has all hosts trusting the bastion, which kind of undoes the point. Pwn the bastion host, and pwn everything. It's trickier, but a decent ssh jumphost requires the user to authenticate to the bastion and the host behind.

deleted 5y ago
[deleted]

aaaaaaaaata 5y ago

> OpenSSH has been battle-tested to death So have wet paper bags ;]