similar to: Chroot of SCP and SFTP-server

I almost never use bare 'scp' or 'sftp' anymore; I start with either 'rsync' or, if 'rsync' is not present and not installable on one end or the other, the "tar-over-bare-ssh" approach: ``` tar cf - localpath | ssh remote.host 'cd remotepath && tar xvf -' ``` I'd be in favor of one of the following: 1. 'scp' goes away, and

On 2020/08/05 16:17, raf wrote: > The problem is when, for example, you only have > scp/sftp access to a remote server, such as your bank, > and you use WinSCP to transfer transaction files to > them to be actioned (people do this where I work), and > the bank hasn't properly protected themselves from this > "vulnerability". I really hope all banks do take this >

On Tue, 2020-06-23 at 08:06 +0200, Markus Friedl wrote: > I had something in mind like this for years, but with slightly > different steps: > My naive approach would be to keep the scp user interface and switch > to the sftp protocol internally. We could add a -M [scp|sftp] option > to scp and select the internal protocol. Later we switch the default > from scp to sftp. > No

Hi, On Thu, Jan 24, 2019 at 08:26:39PM +0000, Colin Watson wrote: > On Thu, Jan 24, 2019 at 12:00:48PM -0800, Jim Knoble wrote: > > 3. 'scp' stays, but becomes the CLI for SFTP, and the SCP protocol breaks. > > Why does "scp becomes the CLI for SFTP" necessitate "the SCP protocol > breaks"? The way scp works today is "run ssh to the remote,

On Jan 24 03:47, Malcolm wrote: > Quoting Chris High <highc at us.ibm.com>: > > > caught my eye. Do you see any 'advantage' to using sftp with an untrusted > > server? If so, any thoughts about making an easy way to disable scp both > > client and server side when doing an installation? > > SFTP allows file resume, while scp does not. If this

Hello all, I've taken a brief skim of the archives available on theaimsgroup and talked to some others regarding the ideas on chroot SSH/SFTP/SCP functionality. I've also investigated a few of the various patches out for chroot sftp|scp|ssh and am a bit of a loss at finding 'an elegant solution' to the problem. Bearing in mind the excellent starting ground of John Furman's

On Fri, 8 Dec 2023 at 07:39, Philip Prindeville <philipp_subx at redfish-solutions.com> wrote: [...] > Problem is that if their default shell isn't sh, ash, dash, bash, zsh, etc. then things break. > Is there a workaround to allow scp/sftp to continue to work even for non-shell accounts? sftp should work regardless of the user's shell since it is invoked as a ssh subsystem

Hi, my goal: sftp/scp only access, without the need for linux users. I want to provide 10 sftp/scp directories to 10 people. Let's call this "virtual account" I don't want to create linux users for each of them. I would like to create one linux user (backup_user). In his home-directory will be 10 directories. For each "virtual account" one directory. Every

scp may be an ugly protocol, but it works, works nicely from a command line, and is quite convenient. FTP (and, presumably, sftp) is not nearly as convenient. Why do you think your recommendation to "use sftp instead" keeps falling on the deaf ear? Usability, perhaps? Perhaps it's time to stop preaching to people about what they should use, but instead - if you really want a change

Damien, Reading the various articles about https://sintonen.fi/advisories/scp-client-multiple-vulnerabilities.txt have caused me to question the wisdom of using scp. Your observation: > Date: Tue, 22 Jan 2019 13:48:34 +1100 (AEDT) > From: Damien Miller <djm at mindrot.org> > Subject: Re: Status of SCP vulnerability > > "Don't use scp with untrusted

On Thu, 2019-01-24 at 12:27 -0600, Ben Lindstrom wrote: > I know it isn't a "UI replacement" but it at least provides a more > complete UI for phasing people off of scp. I don't think this is an ideal solution... OpenSSH should be "overall" secure (that's what it's meant for), and especially not be a collection of tools/algos/etc. of which some(!) are

Hi, I have an HP server with OpenSSH 3.1p1, on which the scp and sftp are giving strange failures. For example: scp, ssh and sftp works fine only for the root user. But for a normal user account only the ssh part works, the scp and sftp fails to connect. I am running UX 11i. Any help wil be appreciated. -- "To learn is a natural pleasure" - Aristotle

I am supporting a site that allows members to upload release files. I have inherited this site which was previously existing. The goal is to allow members to file transfer to and from their project area for release distribution but not to allow general shell access and not to allow access to other parts of the system. Currently rsync and old scp has been restricted using a restricted shell

https://bugzilla.mindrot.org/show_bug.cgi?id=1687 Summary: scp/sftp is not working when using key based (authorized_keys2) authentication Product: Portable OpenSSH Version: 5.1p1 Platform: All OS/Version: Linux Status: NEW Severity: normal Priority: P2 Component: sftp

Hi ya'll- I'm having this weird problem with the new version of OpenSSH compiled on Solaris, version 4.3p2. SSH and SSHD work fine, all is well. But when I try to sftp or scp something I get this: % sftp bullitt Connecting to bullitt... command-line: line 0: Bad configuration option: PermitLocalCommand Connection closed % "PermitLocalCommand" doesn't appear in

we have CENTOS 5.X on server A and Server B. Both servers have Gigabit network card connect to same switch. I test network speed from Server A to Server B and found speed much difference: SFTP: 42 MB/Sec SCP: 20 MB/sec SCP command: scp -Crp -o CompressionLevel=1 user1 at ServerB:/TMP/File1 . Anyone know how to improve SCP speed?

Hi, We have a CLI that certain users get dropped into when they log in. One of the things they can go is generate certificates (actually .p12 key/certificate bundles) that they will then scp out of the box from another host. Problem is that if their default shell isn't sh, ash, dash, bash, zsh, etc. then things break. Is there a workaround to allow scp/sftp to continue to work even for

Hi all, First, my apologies if this is not the right forum for this... if there is a more appropriate place to make OpenSSH feature requests, or if this feature already exists, please let me know. Some background: My company makes an 'embedded' audio server box that runs Debian Linux, and one of the product's features is that users can upload files to the server via SSH, using their

I conjecture that only few of the existing use cases rely on remote expansion. In any case (no pun intended), IMHO it would be better to break a few of the current use cases but leave the majority functional - than kill scp for all. Regards, Uri > On Aug 3, 2020, at 02:50, Jakub Jelen <jjelen at redhat.com> wrote: > > ?On Sat, 2020-08-01 at 00:17 +0000, Blumenthal, Uri - 0553

I've configured OpenSSH_5.3p1 to only allow sftp connections (openssh chroot functionality). i.e. Subsystem sftp internal-sftp Match group sftpusers ChrootDirectory /chroot/%u X11Forwarding no AllowTcpForwarding no ForceCommand internal-sftp So far everything works correctly with sftp but when a user ssh's or scp's to the box the login