Bob
Thanks for taking the oposite point of view.   After using windows for years 
and then installing and running Linux I've learned a lot.  Especially when 
you and other's like Cory explain the why's. 

Well you explained what I did the other day before I got Boyle online.  I 
ssh'd into Tesla then shh'd to EFN.   I liked Larry's response.  :-)  But I 
guess I could say my two boxes I trusted them.  It's so nice to be able to 
use Boyle on ocasion now.  

I like the linuxcare boot disk for the truly paranoid.  However, I don't 
think they would alow it to be used at a public access terminal.  A sample 
question "Excuse me, can I boot this linux care disk? Because I'm really 
paranoid and I don't trust your computer."  :-)  I think that would go over 
real well at EFN or the Public Library.  I Liked the shell account terminals 
at EFN if they still have them?    

After listening to the OpenBSDer on the list I would I'm almost to the point 
of installing it.  A question I have is there a OpenBSD disk like the 
Linuxcare disk which does the same thing?   

Again Thanks Bob 

Tim


On Monday 22 July 2002 01:06, you wrote:
> Timothy Bolz wrote:
> > Wouldn't cygwin and sshd be insecure because it's on a windows box. 
> > Because in windows you can run keyborard loggers and other programs. 
> > Just Curious.
>
> I already read Cory's reply to this question, and I'm going to take
> the opposite viewpoint.
>
> Yes, you should always be careful where you run the ssh client.  Every
> time you run the client, you make it possible for anyone who 0wnz the
> client host to also 0wn the remote host.
>
> It's dangerous to run ssh on a computer whose software you haven't
> audited or installed, such as a public workstation.  It's dangerous to
> daisychain ssh connections, i.e., sit at A, ssh into B, then from B
> ssh into C.  It's dangerous to run ssh clients whose origin you don't
> know, such as the free Java ssh that's floating around, or one that
> just happens to be on the box already.
>
> And since Windows boxes, especially 9X and ME, are inherently hard to
> secure, yes, you're taking an extra risk running ssh on Windows rather
> than on a Unix box.
>
> On the other hand, it's not guaranteed that you'll get hacked when you
> do one of those unsafe things.  You might get away with it for years.
> I don't know anyone who practices 100% safe computing all the time.

Reply via email to