Try: http://www.webattack.com/freeware/server/fwftpserver.shtml
- Original Message -
From: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
To: "VNC Liste" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Sent: Saturday, August 25, 2001 9:37 AM
Subject: FTP server
> Hello,
>
> i using WinVNC to controll my network from serveral places. For
You could try (for Windows) ServU. It is shareware and works fine.
Look at http://www.ftpserv-u.com/
It is app 1 Mb installed and runs fine under W95, W98, W2000
regards,
Ceri Hankey
- Original Message -
From: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
To: "VNC Liste" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Sent: Saturday, Au
If security is not an issue look at any tftp server. Or, for linux,
look up troll-ftp (www.trolltech.com) - an anonymous only stripped down
ftp server.
--Yan
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
>
> Hello,
>
> i using WinVNC to controll my network from serveral places. For
> filetransfer
> i using an ft
Works great for me also.
-Original Message-
From: Tim Waugh
To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: 03/13/2001 11:54 AM
Subject: Re: FTP Server
On Tue, Mar 13, 2001 at 05:19:27PM +, Jonathan Morton wrote:
> Yes, and the intermediate tunnel would probably be SSH in this
example.
>
hanks,
Steve
PS I personally would NOT want an ftp client in the vnc source. I have a ton
of them on my HD (Both server and client) that are open.
-Original Message-
From: Steve Bostedor
To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: 03/12/2001 11:15 AM
Subject: RE: FTP Server
I still disagree. The FTP protoc
NC is better when it comes to desktop control :)
>
>/Bjorn
>
>-Original Message-
>From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]
>Sent: den 13 mars 2001 18:17
>To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
>Subject: Re: FTP Server
>
>
>On Tue, 13 Mar 2001, James ''
>Those double firewalls deny common file transfer mechanisms for a
>reason. I have to side with you network administrator on this.
Actually, the firewall denies very little per se. It's a double-NAT
firewall. The Mac which I want to connect on is on 192.168.*, behind a NAT
gateway which interf
ductive. Cool?
>
> -Steve Bostedor
>
> -Original Message-
> From: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]On Behalf Of Wayne Throop
> Sent: Wednesday, March 14, 2001 4:54 PM
> To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> Cc: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> Subject: Re: FTP Server
>
&
On Wed, 14 Mar 2001, Jonathan Morton wrote:
> Well put. I haven't even been able to *find* a workable, free SSH or SCP
> implementation for my Macs, let alone figure out how to use it.
http://www.macssh.com/
> The same goes for file transfer - and by that I mean across the Internet.
> Putting
While I sympathize with the group that is for including ftp capability it is
entirely non-trivial. I spent many years moving data around from machine to
machine and I concur with Steve Morris (from soapbox below). I have always
had an ftp server running on at least one side of the transfer so ru
, March 14, 2001 4:54 PM
To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Cc: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Subject: Re: FTP Server
: Jonathan Morton <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
: The same goes for file transfer - and by that I mean across the Internet.
: Putting security concerns aside for a moment, I can run a freeware FTP
: server and/o
: Jonathan Morton <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
: The same goes for file transfer - and by that I mean across the Internet.
: Putting security concerns aside for a moment, I can run a freeware FTP
: server and/or client on my Mac with a reasonable amount of ease. However,
: these Macs are behind a double-f
: "Morris, Steve" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
: Why is discussion so adversarial. One class of users has a problem
: and keeps posting requests. Another class of users desn't have that
: problem and basically declares the first group to be stupid because
: they can't figure it out.
Well I certainly ap
On Tue, 13 Mar 2001, Steve Bostedor wrote:
> No one was asking for a SMTP, IRC, gopher, . . .
Correction, no one asked for it yet, but then I'm sure at the begginning
of the VNC project no one asked for FTP.
> Who cares about a single diskette? Isn't your pocket big enough for tw
On Tue, 13 Mar 2001, Bryan A. Pendleton wrote:
> [snip]
> But, from the #2
> perspective, you've got a custom session running, which is started by the
> user, runs everything as the user, can only do things the user is allowed
> to do, etc. This is how the unix side of VNC has been implemented
>I think we have a UNIX guru v.s Windoz end user split here.
I totally agree.
>I am a long time UNIX user/developer. I did a port of V7 UNIX to a 68000 in
>1981. I conceed UNIX guru standing to few people. In many ways my carreer
>has been data transfer. I could create a solution from scratch wi
I guess that's all ya get with free software. Let's not forget the Windows
gurus. ;)
-Original Message-
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
[mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]On Behalf Of Morris, Steve
Sent: Wednesday, March 14, 2001 8:35 AM
To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Subject: RE: FTP Server
(soapbo
(soapbox on)
Why is discussion so adversarial. One class of users has a problem and keeps
posting requests. Another class of users desn't have that problem and
basically declares the first group to be stupid because they can't figure it
out.
Let me state my suspicion:
I think we have a UNIX gu
: No one was asking for a SMTP, IRC, gopher, . . . server, only a
: feature that allows the transfer of files. It is not very simple to
: install a ftp daemon on 3,000 distributed computers world wide, deal
: with the firewall and security issues. Speak for yourself on that
: one, guy. Why g
ahh, more useless sarcasm.
-Original Message-
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
[mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]On Behalf Of John Stephens
Sent: Tuesday, March 13, 2001 6:34 PM
To: '[EMAIL PROTECTED]'
Subject: RE: FTP Server
Why don't we ask that VNC be turned into a mainframe operating
ly attack anyone here.
-Original Message-
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
[mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]On Behalf Of Michael Erdely
Sent: Tuesday, March 13, 2001 6:11 PM
To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Subject: Re: FTP Server
The purpose of VNC was never to provide file transfer capabilities. One of
the nice things
Message-
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
[mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]On Behalf Of Joseph A. Knapka
Sent: Tuesday, March 13, 2001 6:14 PM
To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Subject: Re: FTP Server
Steve Bostedor wrote:
>
> I just think that installing a separate FTP program on all of the
computers
> that I adminis
"Bryan A. Pendleton" wrote:
>
> The whole discussion of the FTP server leads back to another thought I'd
> had for a while, which came up during the discussion of including
> encryption directly in the protocol that I started a few months ago (and
> which I'll be bringing back up towards the end
The whole discussion of the FTP server leads back to another thought I'd
had for a while, which came up during the discussion of including
encryption directly in the protocol that I started a few months ago (and
which I'll be bringing back up towards the end of the school term, when I
have pro
ssage-
From: Steve Bostedor [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]
Sent: Wednesday, 14 March 2001 11:40 a.m.
To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Subject: RE: FTP Server
I just think that installing a separate FTP program on all of the computers
that I administer is a ridiculous idea. Why not let it be part of VNC wi
> 1. From the macroeconomic point of view, there is little
> demand for such a
> package and we're only hearing the vocal few;
>
> 2. The few "end users (especially non UNIX users)" who are
> in the know how
> to set up such an environemnt are not sharing their
> knowledge effectively
Steve Bostedor wrote:
>
> I just think that installing a separate FTP program on all of the computers
> that I administer is a ridiculous idea. Why not let it be part of VNC with
> an option to shut it off for those of you that don't want it. I don't see
> the reason for all of the venomous res
ch 13, 2001 5:39 PM
Subject: RE: FTP Server
> I just think that installing a separate FTP program on all of the
computers
> that I administer is a ridiculous idea. Why not let it be part of VNC
with
> an option to shut it off for those of you that don't want it. I don't see
&
u can turn the
feature off. All of the competing products do this, why hold VNC back?
-Original Message-
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
[mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]On Behalf Of David Rothman
Sent: Tuesday, March 13, 2001 1:52 PM
To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Subject: Re: FTP Server
re: your bottom line...
son, Bjorn" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
To: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Sent: Tuesday, March 13, 2001 1:19 PM
Subject: RE: FTP Server
> Okay, I might be a bit out of line, but I still don't
(really) see the point
> of it.
>
> I understand the need for being able to transfer files
from
Steve:
Heya. Regarding your last note:
> Imagine if someone were to make a windows package which included VNC,
> a SSH client and an FTP client, along with a common configuration
> procedure. I think this would be quite popular and adequately address
> Steve Bostedor's and many other pos
ewed to me.
There has been some good ideas here lately, and I'd rather see one of them
implemented before an FTP server.
/Bjorn
-Original Message-
From: Morris, Steve [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]
Sent: den 13 mars 2001 18:06
To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Subject: RE: FTP Server
Gustafsson
>I use VNC for a variety of purposes, and I very often find it necessary to
>bring back a file. Sometimes because we're using VNC for support
>(trouble-shooting) purposes and we need to bring back diagnostic
>information. Sometimes we generate printed output and we want to bring the
>spoolfile b
On Tue, 13 Mar 2001, Morris, Steve wrote:
> An integrated VNC/SSH/FTP would be a powerful and useful combination to solve a
>single need.
I agree, and packaging VNC with other clients and servers will solve that
need adequately.
> It might not be cost effective for the VNC team to respond to
>
On Tue, Mar 13, 2001 at 05:19:27PM +, Jonathan Morton wrote:
> Yes, and the intermediate tunnel would probably be SSH in this example.
> This does *not* imply, however, that the tech support worker in question is
> able to make that SSH tunnel point where he wants it to. Also, have you
> eve
Gustafsson, Bjorn [[EMAIL PROTECTED]] rather annoyingly writes:
> Sure, someone packaging VNC with
> FTP/HTTP/SMTP/POP3/IRC/NNTP/Napster/Real/Telnet servers
> might be a good idea
Now you're being unfair. There is a real need being discussed here. Making
fun of people with that need does not
>> Consider the following scenario:
>>
>> A tech support worker, behind a corporate firewall, accesses a user's PC
>> which is behind another corporate firewall. These firewalls are pretty
>> tight, and the only way the tech support worker has access to the user's
>> machine is through a single,
]]
Sent: den 13 mars 2001 18:17
To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Subject: Re: FTP Server
On Tue, 13 Mar 2001, James ''Wez'' Weatherall wrote:
> > Consider the following scenario:
> >
> > A tech support worker, behind a corporate firewall, accesses a user's PC
>
Considering that nc is open source as well and does file transfer over
tcp/ip and is not port limited (which btw, an ftp 'server' built in can be
set to work on any port which there seems to be some weird confusion on) and
can also work with ssh. Browsing through all this FTP thread ive noticed a
On Tue, 13 Mar 2001, Lee Allen wrote:
> 3) the client system does not have an FTP client installed (remember, the
> vncviewer is often installed by placing a single executable on the client;
> installing an FTP client is not nearly as simple).
It is simpler. It is usually installed on all the W
On Tue, 13 Mar 2001, James ''Wez'' Weatherall wrote:
> > Consider the following scenario:
> >
> > A tech support worker, behind a corporate firewall, accesses a user's PC
> > which is behind another corporate firewall. These firewalls are pretty
> > tight, and the only way the tech support worke
Koronka Akos wrote:
>
> It's ok to take focus on core devel, but adding a plug-in handling will make
> easier to combine several very-very good features, what is now in different
> packages.
> I think so many people will make plugins if this handling is available. Like
> far manager, or winamp pl
Steve,
On Tue, 13 Mar 2001, Morris, Steve wrote:
> Imagine if someone were to make a windows package which included VNC, a SSH
> client and an FTP client, along with a common configuration procedure. I
> think this would be quite popular and adequately address Steve Bostedor's
> and many other p
Jonathan Morton wrote:
>
> >A built-in FTP server would be great, when using internet connection, not
> >lan.
>
> I'm thinking that maybe FTP per se isn't a good idea, mainly because it's a
> surprisingly big and complex protocol to implement. Ever noticed that
> *good* FTP clients and servers
: Morris, Steve <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
To: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Sent: Tuesday, March 13, 2001 7:15 AM
Subject: RE: FTP Server
> I guess we all know the issues here. What we don't have is a good answer.
> The VNC team has decided to bound the development process by keeping
> Consider the following scenario:
>
> A tech support worker, behind a corporate firewall, accesses a user's PC
> which is behind another corporate firewall. These firewalls are pretty
> tight, and the only way the tech support worker has access to the user's
> machine is through a single, dedica
ugins?
RS.
Koronka Akos
-Original Message-
From: Morris, Steve [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]
Sent: Tuesday, March 13, 2001 4:16 PM
To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Subject: RE: FTP Server
I guess we all know the issues here. What we don't have is a good answer.
The VNC team has decided to
>> (Seriously, a VNC-server-provided FTP server is a really bad idea,
>> IMHO.)
>
>I agree, but I'll confess that I prefer the Unix toolbox approach; create a
>bunch of simple tools that each do one thing well, and chain them together
to
>make more complicated stuff. The applications and protocol
iginal Message-
From: Morris, Steve [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]
Sent: den 13 mars 2001 16:16
To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Subject: RE: FTP Server
I guess we all know the issues here. What we don't have is a good answer.
The VNC team has decided to bound the development process by keeping to the
co
I guess we all know the issues here. What we don't have is a good answer.
The VNC team has decided to bound the development process by keeping to the
core functionality, correctly reasoning that things like file transfer,
secure connection and local printing of remote files are all solved
elsewher
> (Seriously, a VNC-server-provided FTP server is a really bad idea,
> IMHO.)
I agree, but I'll confess that I prefer the Unix toolbox approach; create a
bunch of simple tools that each do one thing well, and chain them together to
make more complicated stuff. The applications and protocols for
esday, March 13, 2001 8:30 AM
To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Subject: RE: FTP Server
>A built-in FTP server would be great, when using internet connection, not
>lan.
I'm thinking that maybe FTP per se isn't a good idea, mainly because it's a
surprisingly big and complex protocol to imp
On Tue, Mar 13, 2001 at 01:29:38PM +, Jonathan Morton wrote:
> >A built-in FTP server would be great, when using internet connection, not
> >lan.
>
> I'm thinking that maybe FTP per se isn't a good idea, mainly because it's a
> surprisingly big and complex protocol to implement. Ever noticed
>A built-in FTP server would be great, when using internet connection, not
>lan.
I'm thinking that maybe FTP per se isn't a good idea, mainly because it's a
surprisingly big and complex protocol to implement. Ever noticed that
*good* FTP clients and servers are hard to come by, especially for
"d
A built-in FTP server would be great, when using internet connection, not
lan.
>Just a nitwit question. But why is a ftp server wanted in VNC? Aren't
>st VNC accessible machine ona network that handles file transfer
>already?I am not seeing a good reason to add the extra code.
--
Just a nitwit question. But why is a ftp server wanted in VNC? Aren't
most VNC accessible machine ona network that handles file transfer
already?I am not seeing a good reason to add the extra code.
Evan
Kurt Seel wrote:
>
> [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
>
> > Anyone looked at putting a small FTP ser
I need to lower my caffeine intake, I know. ;) Sorry if I came off a
little rough.
-Original Message-
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
[mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]On Behalf Of Ran Sasson
Sent: Monday, March 12, 2001 2:27 PM
To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Subject: Re: FTP Server
I agree with Steve
take things easy... ) :-)
Ran
- Original Message -
From: "Steve Bostedor" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
To: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Sent: Monday, March 12, 2001 7:15 PM
Subject: RE: FTP Server
> I still disagree. The FTP protocol does not have any security issues,
only
> c
PROTECTED]
Subject: Re: FTP Server
Reinventing the wheel is also a good way to open up new security holes.
FTP daemons are notorious for having security holes, rather than trying
to integrate one into VNC, use the separate product.
-Dave
On Mon, Mar 12, 2001 at 11:26:38AM -0500, Steve Bost
; Isn't the point of technology to make things easier and more efficient?
>
> -Steve Bostedor
>
> -Original Message-
> From: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]On Behalf Of [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> Sent: Monday, March 12, 2001 11:05 AM
> To: [EMAIL PROT
h one?
Isn't the point of technology to make things easier and more efficient?
-Steve Bostedor
-Original Message-
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
[mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]On Behalf Of [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: Monday, March 12, 2001 11:05 AM
To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Cc: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Subjec
I don't mean to flame you, but why would one want to do such a thing?
If you'd like a Windows FTP server there are plenty available and you
could start one from VNC. If I'm not mistaken Windows98 comes with
one and I'm almost certain NT and 2000 do (at least in the server
flavors).
Tom
On Mon,
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
> Anyone looked at putting a small FTP server within the VNC server
> executable? Or know of a Win32 open source FTP server that I could bodge
> into it?
Whhat about something along these lines ?
http://www.webmin.com/jfs/
Also there is a small web server already in
63 matches
Mail list logo
