Pixel <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> sayeth...
> "Brian J. Murrell" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
>
> > from the quill of Pixel <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> on scroll
> > <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> > >
> > > well, i'm no good at security, but i think "workstation" is mainly
> > > used for home
> > > box where sshd is not needed...
> >
> > Wow, you definately are not good at product marketing either are you
> > Pixel? :-) No offence intended, just a little humor.
>
> thanks for the praises :)
> anti-marketing people are needed!
>
> [...]
>
> > Even if you are targetting the home market, keep in mind that if any
> of
> > my friends have problems with their workstations, I usually just tell
> > them to put it on the Internet and I ssh into it and fix it.
>
> the problem is that you can't allow empty passwords in that case, big
> annoyance
> for mostly home users, uh?
>
> maybe a solution would be a linux/webmin/??? function that would open
> sshd?
>
Or maybe in the install script giving the choice to enable ssh and
disable telnet to all but localhost.
This would allow the home users to have an insecure box should the choose
to, and allow others (us<G>) to have a more secure method of remote
administration.
I personally think that it should default to secure, and only go
into "insecure" mode if a checkbox or other prompt is chosen for home
desktop pc.
That would give a "best of both worlds" solution... leaving it up to the
user to decide what is best for him/her, and if they dont know what they
are doing, by choosing "home workstation" or Home Desktop or what-have-
you, they are given the current non-ssh installation, but "expert"
and "custom" get ssh and disabled (to remote hosts) telnet.
Would that make sense?
(or am I misreading the discussion?)
-John
