On Fri, 17 Sep 2010 07:08:23 -0700 cpolish at surewest.net wrote: > Robert P. J. Day wrote: > > On Fri, 17 Sep 2010, Michel van Deventer wrote: > > > > > > > > > > (another in an ongoing list of things i just want to clarify > > > > for the sake of future courses taught on centos.) > > > > > > > > from this RHEL doc page: > > > > > > > > http://docs.redhat.com/docs/en-US/Red_Hat_Enterprise_Linux/5/html/Deployment_Guide/s1-openssh-server-config.html > > > > > > > > the reader is advised to, for the sake of security, > > > > remove/disable > > > vsftpd, ostensibly in favour of sftp/sftp-server. really? > > > > > > > > i can obviously see disallowing stuff like telnet and rsh and > > > > rlogin, that's a no-brainer. but advising against vsftpd for > > > > the sake > > > of security? i'm not sure i see the logic in that. thoughts? > > > > > As FTP is a clear-text protocol, I would surely advise against > > > leaving it on :) I only run a vsftpd server on one of my machines > > > for the customers comfort, but that will change in the near > > > future ! > > > > > > I can easily image scenarios where unencrypted traffic with > > > usernames/passwords is disallowed. > > > > but you can configure vsftpd to have secure connection: > > > > http://wiki.vpslink.com/Configuring_vsftpd_for_secure_connections_(TLS/SSL/SFTP) > > > > would that not address that issue? i'm not arguing against secure > > communications, only that that manual page so cavalierly dismisses > > vsftpd when it seems clear that you *can* configure vsftpd to be > > secure. > > Google for vsftpd + bugtraq. Be afraid. > I used to have vsftpd laying around unused after I started using sftp but I just went ahead and removed it. The less services I have running the fewer points of entry are there, so if you can already do what ftp does with ssh/sftp why open up ftp. Unless you are supporting some legacy apps that do not support sftp.