Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

PuTTY 0.68 has been released

chiark.greenend.org.uk

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

61–70 of 152 posts

Re: PuTTY 0.68 has been released

#61

Post by petee »

atomicUpdate wrote: post #20
snksnk wrote: post #9

Earlier quoted context omitted.

And I would recommend MobaXterm, definitely also worth to try. http://mobaxterm.mobatek.net/

It's definitely very good and has a lot to offer, but I still can't justify $70 for some reason. The free version offers enough functionality to be a very good PuTTY alternative though.

I was about to, until I read the fine print and realized it's $70 to buy, but you'll only get updates for a year; after that you buy again or stick with your current version - no bug fixes. Were there a more reasonable price for non-commercial use, I would have no problem buying sooner.

On the other hand, its has the only windows Mosh implementation...the best thing since sliced bread and tmux!

Re: PuTTY 0.68 has been released

#62

Post by jjcm »

Loved putty for years, but these days I've been using mosh over ssh. Having persistent sessions and text prediction means no more dropped connections, no more waiting a couple seconds if the wifi is buggy for whatever reason. Personally I use chrome's mosh extension: https://chrome.google.com/webstore/detail/mosh/ooiklbnjmhbcg... Works great and I can pin it to my taskbar.

Relevant recent discussion on mosh: https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=11572146

Re: PuTTY 0.68 has been released

#66

Post by ulkesh »

Putty is great and has been for a very long time. Always glad to see it still in active development.

Though, for Windows, once I found MobaXterm I never looked back. Of course on the Linux side nothing to me beats tmux or terminator.

Re: PuTTY 0.68 has been released

#68

Post by monk_e_boy »

beachstartup wrote: post #56
__jal wrote: post #54

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Not a windows person, so I can't speak to how the directory is treated, but I've watched enough people run applications from the Downloads directory to wonder about it.

with putty i would be surprised if most didn't run it straight from the desktop. i would be a dirty liar if i said i haven't, countless times.

This. Without an installer that puts a link into the start menu, everyone I've ever worked with just dumps it on the desktop. I used to throw a symlink into the start menu, but when other devs used my machine they expected it to be on the desktop. Just one of those quirks of using PUTTY

Re: PuTTY 0.68 has been released

#69

Post by JohnTHaller »

caf wrote: post #52
based2 wrote: post #2

Release Notes: Security fix: an integer overflow bug in the agent forwarding code. See vuln-agent-fwd-overflow. Security fix: the Windows PuTTY binaries should no longer be vulnerable to hijacking by specially named DLLs in the same directory (on versions of Windows where they previously were). See vuln-indirect-dll-hijack. Windows PuTTY no longer sets a restrictive process ACL by default, because this turned out to…

Isn't this "DLL hijacking" thing a bit overblown? The directory an application runs from on Windows has always been considered part of the security perimeter of the application. If you can drop a malicious DLL where putty.exe lives, can't you just drop a malicious putty.exe?

It's bad if you use an insecure browser like Chrome. Chrome allows any website you visit to download DLLs directly to your Downloads directory without user interaction. Then, any installer you download and run will use the infected DLLs unless specifically keyed to look in system32 for them.

Additionally, something can infect your PC and alter your PATH. Then PuTTY might pick up a fake Windows DLL from elsewhere on your machine. But if your machine is infected and something is messing with the Windows path, you have bigger problems.

Post reply on HN