Re: ssh vs rsh

["Jorge L. deLyra" <delyra@latt.if.usp.br>]

> Hello, I have a question that may have come up a couple of times
> before....

> ¿How does ssh compare with rsh in performance?

I have never seen rsh show up in "top" using up CPU time, ssh does that.
But there is no visible performance difference that a normal user can feel
in normal daily use. I suppose other factors count more...

> ¿Is there really any added value to security by using ssh?

Well, yeah... But it is not the kind of thing that will change your life
forever. The two main security concerns on a normal system are invasions
through the net and local user discipline, ssh can help on both but is not
decisive, so far as I can see. The more decisive things are using tcpd and
closing most of your machines inside a private network in the first case
and shadow plus md5 passwords to help with the second. Plus that big stick
kept behind the door... |:-)

> ¿what do people actually use and why?

Mostly ssh nowadays, because it does X11 forwarding and allows user and
root login without password over the network. Both are very nice and handy
things. Also, it comes with scp and sftp, which are also nice and handy.
Plus it does not crash when authorization fails, it asks for a password.
The new version which is distributed with Debian-Woody has the problem of
not having that traditional soft-link-to-rsh (or ssh) structure, but you
can get around that with a simple wrapper.

Of course, there is always that pleasure of using cutting-edge technology
and of knowing that the CIA cannot read your network traffic. Go for it!

							Cheers,

----------------------------------------------------------------
        Jorge L. deLyra,  Associate Professor of Physics
            The University of Sao Paulo,  IFUSP-DFMA
       For more information: finger delyra@latt.if.usp.br
----------------------------------------------------------------