Re: [TCLUG:19127] SSH Clients (was Re: Windows Installers)

[Mike Hicks <hick0088@tc.umn.edu>]

Chris Schumann wrote:
> 
> Hi all,
> 
> Mike mentioned rolling out SSH and X client software for windows. Since
> most commercial applications have their own installers, I'm curious
> about the need for an installer at all, unless it's to install multiple
> packages at one go.

After mulling it over a little bit, I think I must have had an
exceptionally low opinion of the people where I work -- I've still only
met a handful of people there..  I was planning on wrapping PuTTY,
perhaps along with an X-Windows package of some sort, into a little
auto-install-and-make-shortcuts-and-tweak-the-registry package.  

> Also, I did some hard looking at SSH clients and found only one that was
> licensed by RSA, and the others either mentioned that they may not be
> legal to use in the US, or seemed completely ignorant that they may be
> publishing illegal software. (And yes, I know that key RSA patents
> expire on September 1.)

I saw that warning on the PuTTY homepage, and I am somewhat concerned. 
I figure that if I have to, I can (hopefully) compile a `legal'
version.  However, I don't know if that's even much of an option with
that client (has anyone bothered to compile it?)

However, I do notice that the versions of ssh used on the central mail
servers here at the U, along with versions in several other areas, do
not link to the RSAREF libraries.  Perhaps the U has a site-wide license
of some kind, or maybe we're all just filthy criminals ;-)

> Mike and others, I'd appreciate any information you could provide on
> your choice of SSH client and why you chose it/them.

I used to use TeraTerm SSH when I had to deal with Windows, but that
required a lot of fiddling to get everything right.  For one thing, I
hate terminal windows with white backgrounds!  The reverse video option
never worked quite right for me.  Also, TTSSH's window didn't behave
like an xterm by default -- ie if you make an xterm bigger, it gives you
more rows and columns (unlike normal DOS windows where making the window
bigger makes the font increase in size..)

PuTTY just behaves better by default.  However, I kind of think it would
be better for PuTTY to just be an SSH client, which would prevent users
from accidentally clicking the `telnet' radio button and then
complaining that they can't connect anymore...  

-- 
 _  _  _  _ _  ___    _ _  _  ___ _ _  __   Fraud(n): A telephone 
/ \/ \(_)| ' // ._\  / - \(_)/ ./| ' /(__   number starting with  
\_||_/|_||_|_\\___/  \_-_/|_|\__\|_|_\ __)  "1-900" 
[ Mike Hicks | http://umn.edu/~hick0088/ | mailto:hick0088@tc.umn.edu ]