4 ms·

Sshfs for Windows

81 points by keepamovin 2y ago

janci 2y ago
While still useful to have a native tool, you can use WSL to mount a sshfs path in windows. I even use it for LUKS containers.
- 8K832d7tNmiQ 2y ago
  Not everyone wants to install a huge resource just to use one feature.
  - tux2bsd 2y ago
    [dead]
  - sulandor 2y ago
    thou wsl is heavier than cygwin, both options aren't really lightweight.
- ranger_danger 2y ago
  I thought sshfs on Linux is no longer maintained
  - bubblesnort 2y ago
    If it works, don't fix it.
    - ranger_danger 2y ago
      I don't think we should be telling people to keep using unsecure versions of ssh.
      - nsteel 2y ago
        An insecure version of secure shell doesn't "work".
        ranger_danger 2y ago
        It's ok for people to have different definitions of things
        nsteel 2y ago
        People also have different ideas of what "unmaintained" means. The earlier poster was likely highlighting the common misconception that software must be constantly changed in order to be considered maintained. Personally, if something is called secure shell and it's not secure, then it's broken. Maybe I'm weird.
        ranger_danger 2y ago
        The definition of maintained in indeed subjective, so I don't think it can even be called a misconception. People just disagree on what it means, but there can't be a single right or wrong answer. Some people prefer secure software to be regularly updated and audited and won't trust other programs. I think it's a perfectly reasonable position, but I also know not everyone will think the same way.
      - pletnes 2y ago
        It’s quite possible that security is handled by ssh such that sshfs isn’t exposed over the network. If sshfs can use newer ssh it might be just fine.
        opan 2y ago
        I am curious how much stuff sshfs itself does and how much is just handled by ssh or fuse on your system. (am not a programmer, unfortunately, before someone says to read the code)
  - opan 2y ago
    What are you basing that on? It had a release in 2022 and last commit is 7 months old. It probably hasn't needed any new features in a while. I'm not sure how often it would need security updates. Ah, I see now there's a note in the README[0]. It sounds more like it's in maintenance mode / understaffed than completely abandoned, but I suppose it's worth being aware of. sshfs has been a killer feature for me on my machines for years for things like playing back stuff from my media library in mpv while it's stored on another machine. I found it to be easier to use and less glitchy than NFS. So I will likely continue to use it. [0] https://github.com/libfuse/sshfs?tab=readme-ov-file#development-status https://github.com/libfuse/sshfs?tab=readme-ov-file#developm...
- sulandor 2y ago
  > you can use WSL to mount a sshfs path in windows and then access them from the host via virtual smb shares To view all of your available Linux distributions and their root file systems in Windows File explorer, in the address bar enter: \\wsl$ https://learn.microsoft.com/en-us/windows/wsl/filesystems https://learn.microsoft.com/en-us/windows/wsl/filesystems
  - actionfromafar 2y ago
    Ackshully I think those are Plan 9 file shares, not smb.
3np 2y ago
It seems like this is useful for mounting sshfs drives on a Windows client. Anyone know how to achieve the inverse? That is, I have SSH access to a Windows host (no WSL) and would like to access its filesystem over sshfs or scp. How to do git remotes over such a connection would also be helpful because I haven't figured that out, either.
- leni536 2y ago
  You can install openssh server and client as Windows components nowadays, somewhere from settings. You can set up git remotes just fine with it, I don't remember trying sshfs.
  - donatj 2y ago
    It's wild you can SSH into a straight up regular old DOS prompt (or WSL fwiw) with it. There must be some sort of command code translation layer in action to make that work.
    - actionfromafar 2y ago
      With Cygwin you could ssh into cmd.exe on Windows NT 4.0
    - loa_in_ 2y ago
      You can ssh into any shell, it's always determined after the login.
  - baq 2y ago
    Setting up authorized keys was a bit tricky IIRC, but otherwise can confirm it’s bundled as part of windows and just works.
  - pxc 2y ago
    They're both missing a lot of features, and which features are missing/unsupported is not documented in the tool itself (it just silently fails if you try to use options they haven't ported over, instead of telling you they're unsupported either in the docs or at run time). The client is missing multiplexing (ControlMaster, etc.), for example. The server also has various quirks, including requiring extra configuration to allow SSHing in to administrator accounts. If you can get away with doing everything in WSL instead, you're better off.
sulandor 2y ago
is it stable now?
- atmanactive 2y ago
  I stopped using it because of this bug [1], otherwise, it was great. The fastest SSH mount on Windows I ever seen. Real shame. [1] https://github.com/winfsp/sshfs-win/issues/244 https://github.com/winfsp/sshfs-win/issues/244
kijin 2y ago
It baffles me that Windows Explorer still doesn't know how to connect to an SFTP site out of the box. It has been able to handle FTP sites since decades ago, and Windows has shipped with a working SSH client for several years now. Putting them together should have been a no-brainer. Even Microsoft's own VS Code can browse remote filesystems over SSH as if they were local drives. But no, Windows Explorer just keeps getting slower and crapper instead of gaining useful functions.
xchip 2y ago
installer is ~5Mb, that is a great sign!
currysausage 2y ago
Looking for something like this right now. How does it compare to rclone [1]? [1] https://rclone.org/sftp/ https://rclone.org/sftp/
rldjbpin 2y ago
i always figured that wsl2 used something similar to show the "guest" drive in explorer (especially since it would also show up like a network drive). however it looks like they directly mount the virtual drive (https://learn.microsoft.com/en-us/windows/wsl/wsl2-mount-disk https://learn.microsoft.com/en-us/windows/wsl/wsl2-mount-dis...). this partially explains why it was so performant compared to sshfs.

81 points by keepamovin 2y ago

While still useful to have a native tool, you can use WSL to mount a sshfs path in windows. I even use it for LUKS containers.

8K832d7tNmiQ 2y ago
Not everyone wants to install a huge resource just to use one feature.
- tux2bsd 2y ago
  [dead]
- sulandor 2y ago
  thou wsl is heavier than cygwin, both options aren't really lightweight.
ranger_danger 2y ago
I thought sshfs on Linux is no longer maintained
- bubblesnort 2y ago
  If it works, don't fix it.
  - ranger_danger 2y ago
    I don't think we should be telling people to keep using unsecure versions of ssh.
    - nsteel 2y ago
      An insecure version of secure shell doesn't "work".
      - ranger_danger 2y ago
        It's ok for people to have different definitions of things
        nsteel 2y ago
        People also have different ideas of what "unmaintained" means. The earlier poster was likely highlighting the common misconception that software must be constantly changed in order to be considered maintained. Personally, if something is called secure shell and it's not secure, then it's broken. Maybe I'm weird.
        ranger_danger 2y ago
        The definition of maintained in indeed subjective, so I don't think it can even be called a misconception. People just disagree on what it means, but there can't be a single right or wrong answer. Some people prefer secure software to be regularly updated and audited and won't trust other programs. I think it's a perfectly reasonable position, but I also know not everyone will think the same way.
    - pletnes 2y ago
      It’s quite possible that security is handled by ssh such that sshfs isn’t exposed over the network. If sshfs can use newer ssh it might be just fine.
      - opan 2y ago
        I am curious how much stuff sshfs itself does and how much is just handled by ssh or fuse on your system. (am not a programmer, unfortunately, before someone says to read the code)
- opan 2y ago
  What are you basing that on? It had a release in 2022 and last commit is 7 months old. It probably hasn't needed any new features in a while. I'm not sure how often it would need security updates. Ah, I see now there's a note in the README[0]. It sounds more like it's in maintenance mode / understaffed than completely abandoned, but I suppose it's worth being aware of. sshfs has been a killer feature for me on my machines for years for things like playing back stuff from my media library in mpv while it's stored on another machine. I found it to be easier to use and less glitchy than NFS. So I will likely continue to use it. [0] https://github.com/libfuse/sshfs?tab=readme-ov-file#development-status https://github.com/libfuse/sshfs?tab=readme-ov-file#developm...
sulandor 2y ago
> you can use WSL to mount a sshfs path in windows and then access them from the host via virtual smb shares To view all of your available Linux distributions and their root file systems in Windows File explorer, in the address bar enter: \\wsl$ https://learn.microsoft.com/en-us/windows/wsl/filesystems https://learn.microsoft.com/en-us/windows/wsl/filesystems
- actionfromafar 2y ago
  Ackshully I think those are Plan 9 file shares, not smb.

3np 2y ago

It seems like this is useful for mounting sshfs drives on a Windows client. Anyone know how to achieve the inverse? That is, I have SSH access to a Windows host (no WSL) and would like to access its filesystem over sshfs or scp. How to do git remotes over such a connection would also be helpful because I haven't figured that out, either.

leni536 2y ago
You can install openssh server and client as Windows components nowadays, somewhere from settings. You can set up git remotes just fine with it, I don't remember trying sshfs.
- donatj 2y ago
  It's wild you can SSH into a straight up regular old DOS prompt (or WSL fwiw) with it. There must be some sort of command code translation layer in action to make that work.
  - actionfromafar 2y ago
    With Cygwin you could ssh into cmd.exe on Windows NT 4.0
  - loa_in_ 2y ago
    You can ssh into any shell, it's always determined after the login.
- baq 2y ago
  Setting up authorized keys was a bit tricky IIRC, but otherwise can confirm it’s bundled as part of windows and just works.
- pxc 2y ago
  They're both missing a lot of features, and which features are missing/unsupported is not documented in the tool itself (it just silently fails if you try to use options they haven't ported over, instead of telling you they're unsupported either in the docs or at run time). The client is missing multiplexing (ControlMaster, etc.), for example. The server also has various quirks, including requiring extra configuration to allow SSHing in to administrator accounts. If you can get away with doing everything in WSL instead, you're better off.

sulandor 2y ago

is it stable now?

atmanactive 2y ago
I stopped using it because of this bug [1], otherwise, it was great. The fastest SSH mount on Windows I ever seen. Real shame. [1] https://github.com/winfsp/sshfs-win/issues/244 https://github.com/winfsp/sshfs-win/issues/244

kijin 2y ago

It baffles me that Windows Explorer still doesn't know how to connect to an SFTP site out of the box. It has been able to handle FTP sites since decades ago, and Windows has shipped with a working SSH client for several years now. Putting them together should have been a no-brainer. Even Microsoft's own VS Code can browse remote filesystems over SSH as if they were local drives. But no, Windows Explorer just keeps getting slower and crapper instead of gaining useful functions.

xchip 2y ago

installer is ~5Mb, that is a great sign!

currysausage 2y ago

Looking for something like this right now. How does it compare to rclone [1]? [1] https://rclone.org/sftp/ https://rclone.org/sftp/

rldjbpin 2y ago

i always figured that wsl2 used something similar to show the "guest" drive in explorer (especially since it would also show up like a network drive). however it looks like they directly mount the virtual drive (https://learn.microsoft.com/en-us/windows/wsl/wsl2-mount-disk https://learn.microsoft.com/en-us/windows/wsl/wsl2-mount-dis...). this partially explains why it was so performant compared to sshfs.