On Wed, 2009-06-03 at 18:26 -0300, Gerhard Fiedler wrote:
> Herbert Graf wrote:
> 
> >> Carlos Marcano wrote:
> >> 
> >>> Now, giving it  a deeper thought I believe that I would need some
> >>> data checksum and integrity check system for the data transfers to
> >>> the backup machine...
> >> 
> >> Use ftp -- that's what it's for ("file transfer protocol" :)
> > 
> > I'd much prefer sftp. You don't need to run anything "special"
> > server, as long as your machine has an SSH server sftp will work. 
> > 
> > Beyond everything else, it's much more secure then ftp.
> 
> This seems to be a mixed environment (Carlos wrote "samba" :), and an
> ssh server is more "special" :) on Windows than an ftp server. 

I disagree here. Even on windows, a ftp server needs to be installed, so
whether you do that or an ssh server doesn't really change anything
IMHO. As for clients, yes, windows has a built in ftp client, but it is
beyond horrid IMHO.

> And since
> this is a wired LAN, security is not an issue. 

Why? Just because it's wired doesn't mean it's secure. Is there a WAP on
the network? FTP is plain text, running a packet sniffer I can get your
full login credentials, and chances are, as with most people, those
credentials will work for many more things then just the local FTP
server.

The additional work for SSH is zero, there is no excuse IMHO. Even if
you think there is additional work, I'd rate it as well worth the
effort.

> So in this situation, ftp
> -- with all its drawbacks -- is probably quite a viable choice for file
> transfer.

FTP is an ancient protocol which IMHO should never be used anymore. Just
my opinion. TTYL

-- 
http://www.piclist.com PIC/SX FAQ & list archive
View/change your membership options at
http://mailman.mit.edu/mailman/listinfo/piclist