4 ms·
I don't see why you disqualify SSH here. If you want a system that only deals with filesystem operations, I suggest NFS. It is neither firewall-, NAT-, proxy- o
by soult 15y ago
I don't see why you disqualify SSH here. If you want a system that only deals with filesystem operations, I suggest NFS. It is neither firewall-, NAT-, proxy- or browser-friendly, is not cross-platform (Windows support only if you pay extra) and is neither encrypted nor authenticated. But hey, it deals with filesystem operations only.
If, on the other hand, you want a system that meets your last 3 requirements, just use SSH/SFTP.
- toyg 15y agoSSH is a pain to secure properly, and the potential for mischief is huge. There is no sudo in FTP.
- Hemospectrum 15y agoIt's straightforward to permit SSH access but not shell logins.... if you can administer user and group settings. I guess stuff like scponly (http://freecode.com/projects/scponly http://freecode.com/projects/scponly) is useless if you're running Windows server-side.
- kree10 15y agoNot that I'd like to encourage it, but there could be a sudo in FTP, along the lines of WU-FTPd's infamous support for a "SITE EXEC" command.