3 ms·
The author claims that sshpass is "broken by design" and goes on to show some examples of why, without ever explaining anything. Can anyone enlighten me why ss
by dark-star 3y ago
The author claims that sshpass is "broken by design" and goes on to show some examples of why, without ever explaining anything.
Can anyone enlighten me why sshpass is broken, or explain the examples on that page?
- erinnh 3y agoI’ve always been told that ssh is not supposed to work non-interactively. Which is the whole reason for sshpass, to work non-interactively. Ie. Broken by design.
- nine_k 3y agoWhat, how about scp and sshfs? I can argue that SSH password auth only makes sense.as in interactive affair; for non-interactive auth cases, there are public keys, certificates, smart cards, etc.
- deleted 3y ago[deleted]
- dark-star 3y agoI totally agree, but sometimes you have no other choice (e.g. devices that only offer password auth), and in that case it is claimed that sspass is bad ("broken by design" according to the passh author) and passh is good. And that's what I'm confused about
- vbernat 3y agoAuthor here. I don't claim sshpass is "broken by design". I claim it is brittle as it relies on the detection of a password prompt. passh author has several examples here: https://github.com/clarkwang/passh/blob/master/sshpass-broken.md https://github.com/clarkwang/passh/blob/master/sshpass-broke....
- rovr138 3y agohttps://github.com/clarkwang/passh/ https://github.com/clarkwang/passh/ On the sidebar, in the about, it says, > sshpass is broken by design This is another repo. But probably where they got it.
- dark-star 3y agoyeah, sorry, I was under the impression that the autor was also the author of that repo.
- dark-star 3y agoSorry, I was under the impression that you were also the author of passh. I take that statemen back, obviously (can't edit my post anymore)
- bityard 3y agoYou may wish to edit your comment to clarify that the author of https://github.com/clarkwang/passh https://github.com/clarkwang/passh claims sshpass is broken by design, not the author of the linked article.
- MikePlacid 3y agoYou are probably asking about the passh page. Examples there show that sshpass creates a new permanent tty entry with each use, while passh does not. More importantly though is that sshpass keeps your password permanently on your computer, thus increasing security risks considerably.
- dark-star 3y agoYeah, but that's my question, why is all that stuff about TTYs bad? The examples basically say: bad: bash-4.4# tty /dev/pts/18 // the bash's stdin is also connected to pts/18 good: bash-4.4# tty /dev/pts/18 // the bash's stdin is connected to the new pts/36 ...and stuff about controlling terminals and missing job control, but why are these things bad? And yes, if I use either sshpass or passh, the password will have to be "on my computer" (i.e. in a script or text file), that's the whole point of it: accessing devices that don't do public-key authentication non-interactively