[Date Prev][Date Next] [Thread Prev][Thread Next] [Date Index] [Thread Index]

Re: ssh connection without passwd



Thanks for help,
You are right normally that is enough,
but on my miniPC running DSL (small Damn..) distro, the command
ssh-add  doensn't work ???   so even  if I user the Priv/Pub key I
have to give the paraphrase??

For this reason I want to send in the line the password , I haven't
security problem, I work in secure LAN.

In fact I have a serveur where an application runs,  I want to send
the display to thin  Client, Where I installed DSL, because the disk (
just a flas) is small (500 MB) and can't support a big distro.
I tried the command like   on server for example:
gedit   --display=192.168.20.173:1  , and other  :0 , but nothing
came.       the address corresponds to the remote machine,  where
xhost +        is activated.

I noticed that   when you run    vncserver , it creates  the command

xtigntvnc      :1   -desktop X   -auth /home/user/.Xauthority
It opens a port for the X server ( it  uses port 5901  )

The solution is somewhere here ??!

Thanks for help
best regards
bela



thanks for help.

On Thu, Jun 19, 2008 at 3:07 PM, Anthony <anthony.berger@cea.fr> wrote:
> Hello,
>
> if a understand, you want to connect to a host without password throught
> ssh.
> Use the ~/.ssh/authorized_keys
>
> add the pub key of HostA in the authorized_keys of HostB.
> You will be able to connect to HostB from HostA.
>
> by
>
> Anthony
>
> abdelkader belahcene a écrit :
>>
>> Hi every one,
>>
>> I am using DSL on small miniPC.
>>
>> I tried the ssh-keygen it seemed running correctly, it generates the
>> key (pub and priv),
>> but the ssh-add  gave  cannot open a connection to
>>  authentifcation agent  ???? , I tried it after ssh-agent I got same
>> error.
>>
>>
>> In fact I want an automatic (  from scrpit without passwd ) connection
>> to myserver using ssh. I don't know if ssh has an option to disable
>> the passwd or  to send it thru the command ???
>>
>> thanks a lot
>> best regards
>> bela
>>
>>
>>
>
>


Reply to: