41–50 of 63 posts
Why not just use SSH?
Because SSH might be blocked, and not only trough port 22 blocking but firewalls sniffing traffic and blocking on OpenSSH in the connection (eg. SSH-2.0-OpenSSH_8.1).
Why not just use SSH?
Earlier quoted context omitted.
As an an example, at my work you cannot make any outbound ssh connection. The only way to get one is to apply for a specific connection , where you have to explain why you need an outbound connection, in which case they open a port for you and the remote machine you specified.
if it's just filtering of certain ports, you can just set your ssh port to 80 or 443
I guess if that work depends on how the proxy is set up.
This thread is interesting, I'll be looking for other suggestions in the comments. I'm currently using the free option of remote.it to connect to a raspberry pi behind a router, though I always have to go through the step of obtaining the connection url and random port before using something like putty.
> Access your device's terminal from anywhere via the web Nah, nice try, but I'm good with ssh, key based authentication and few white-listed IPs.
It’d be nice if you could just outbound ssh from anywhere that has a browser, but sadly this isn’t the case.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
It’d be nice if you could just outbound ssh from anywhere that has a browser, but sadly this isn’t the case.
What do you mean by that?
Edit: Though these MITM vendors will soon have fun with DNS over https and encrypted SNI. Guess they will have to resort to being browser plugins?
Why not just use SSH?
Because SSH might be blocked, and not only trough port 22 blocking but firewalls sniffing traffic and blocking on OpenSSH in the connection (eg. SSH-2.0-OpenSSH_8.1).
The patches add the possibility of specifying a different target host, whereas the original wetty only allowed connecting to the host currently executing wetty.
I run it in a container, I've skimmed the source code and it disarmingly simple: it performs a forkpty call to spawn the ssh client binary and then the connection goes on as the forked process is forwarded raw characters.
Under the security POV is kinda okay as everything is tunneled via TLS and the endpoint is (at least in my installation) not advertised very much. I check the server access logs from time to time and I don't see any activity besides my accesses.
In general a web based terminal is very handy, I wouldn't dismiss such a technology so quickly and superficially.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
It’d be nice if you could just outbound ssh from anywhere that has a browser, but sadly this isn’t the case.
With the help of an additional “proxy”, you can. One such proxy software is Apache Guacamole. It doesn’t only do remote desktop, it also does SSH.