[deleted]
OpenSSH for Windows update
11–20 of 146 posts
Re: OpenSSH for Windows update
#12Very off topic - I thought that publically was a mis-spelling, but apparently it may be acceptable now!
http://english.stackexchange.com/questions/45136/difference-...
Re: OpenSSH for Windows update
#13> Address POSIX compatibility concerns Best way to address POSIX compatibility concerns is implementing a proper POSIX layer in Windows (and not in a half-baked manner like the now deprecated SUA). I can't imagine how it would hurt anybody.
Because people would build for that instead of Win32.
Re: OpenSSH for Windows update
#14> Address POSIX compatibility concerns Best way to address POSIX compatibility concerns is implementing a proper POSIX layer in Windows (and not in a half-baked manner like the now deprecated SUA). I can't imagine how it would hurt anybody.
Because people would build for that instead of Win32.
So how would it hurt anybody exactly?
Re: OpenSSH for Windows update
#15> Leverage Windows crypto api’s instead of OpenSSL/LibreSSL and run as Windows Service Was wondering about that. I'm surprised the OpenBSD team is accepting the commits - something so fundamental and Windows specific doesn't seem like their kind of thing - but great! PS. If you're coming from a Unix background and interested in learning posh: https://certsimple.com/rosetta-stone
Was just coming here to voice my concerns over this choice as well, wondering what their reasoning is for changing crypto systems.
Duplication of effort and attack surface. Now, instead of worrying about just keeping Windows' crypto api secure, Microsoft would have to worry about libressl as well?
Long term, if this is truly a first-party supported SSHd, it makes sense.
Re: OpenSSH for Windows update
#16Re: OpenSSH for Windows update
#17> Leverage Windows crypto api’s instead of OpenSSL/LibreSSL and run as Windows Service Was wondering about that. I'm surprised the OpenBSD team is accepting the commits - something so fundamental and Windows specific doesn't seem like their kind of thing - but great! PS. If you're coming from a Unix background and interested in learning posh: https://certsimple.com/rosetta-stone
Was just coming here to voice my concerns over this choice as well, wondering what their reasoning is for changing crypto systems.
A crypto system is a big and complex thing, subtle and quick to anger, and I can't blame Microsoft for wanting to concentrate on the one they're already supporting, instead of having to support two.
On the other hand, for the exact same reason, I expect OpenSSH probably isn't interested in supporting anything besides LibreSSL and maybe OpenSSL, at least while they're so closely related.
Re: OpenSSH for Windows update
#18I am waiting the moment when I can throw away WinRM and SSH to all the servers.
Hell yes. Watching packer shit a brick 5 times a day trying to upload virtualbox guest additions via WinRM makes me want this yesterday. Also I had to up the memory ceiling on WinRM to 800Mb (WTF!) to even get it to complete.
It really is surprisingly bad, isn't it? I recently was involved in a continuous deployment system targeting Windows. We simply couldn't get WinRM to reliably upload fast and ended up installing SSH everywhere.
Re: OpenSSH for Windows update
#19I am waiting the moment when I can throw away WinRM and SSH to all the servers.
This, so much. The current "endpoint bindings" are really aggravating to deal with, the slow speed... I can't wait! :-)
Re: OpenSSH for Windows update
#20> Leverage Windows crypto api’s instead of OpenSSL/LibreSSL and run as Windows Service Was wondering about that. I'm surprised the OpenBSD team is accepting the commits - something so fundamental and Windows specific doesn't seem like their kind of thing - but great! PS. If you're coming from a Unix background and interested in learning posh: https://certsimple.com/rosetta-stone
Was just coming here to voice my concerns over this choice as well, wondering what their reasoning is for changing crypto systems.
I imagine it's nothing more complicated than "OpenSSL isn't the native crypto implementation on Windows, SChannel is". Microsoft's engineers are probably much more familiar with SChannel, and they don't want to have to test/validate two crypto systems in parallel. Besides, this should make OpenSSH better in the long run; it should be able to have any compatible crypto layer underneath.