On 08.08.2016 2:01, Andrey Chernov wrote: > On 08.08.2016 1:48, Xin Li wrote: >> Well, despite the fact that I have to admit that I get locked out from >> my own storage box too, however (even without wearing any hat) I am for >> the change and would blame myself for being lazy in adopting the change >> when the upstream have announced it earlier about a year ago. >> >> Compatibility with legacy software/hardware, sure, but if we don't stop >> at some point, it would be like SSL 2.0 which people have pointed out >> several flaws in 1995 and take 16 years to get deprecated and still bite >> people in 2014. >> >> We should do something like what OpenSSH have done by creating a page >> describing the motivation, the impact, the temporary but discouraged >> workaround, etc., and mention it in the release notes to prevent people >> from being bite. > > I agree. I am not seeking hardly, stopping after first solution, but at > least one workaround found: using security/putty port. It still supports > all obsoleted stuff. One disadvantage: in terminal mode it requires X11.
Forgot to mention: openssh keys must be converted to putty keys format first using puttygen.
signature.asc
Description: OpenPGP digital signature
