full-disclosure - SSH vs. TLS

lists.openwall.net		lists / announce owl-users owl-dev john-users john-dev passwdqc-users yescrypt popa3d-users / oss-security kernel-hardening musl sabotage tlsify passwords / crypt-dev xvendor / Bugtraq Full-Disclosure linux-kernel linux-netdev linux-ext4 linux-hardening linux-cve-announce PHC
Open Source and information security mailing list archives

Hash Suite: Windows password security audit tool. GUI, reports in PDF.

[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [day] [month] [year] [list]

From: gerhard at fugro-jason.com (Gerhard den Hollander)
Subject: SSH vs. TLS

* Ng, Kenneth (US) <kenng@...g.com> (Tue, Jun 29, 2004 at 12:30:12PM -0500)
> Today this is a straw man arguement.  You can tunnel practically anything
> over any protocol.  I've seen NFS tunneled over EMAIL.  Yes, when you type
> "ls" the NFS request packet gets UUENCODED into an email, sent over
> sendmail, fed into a decoder and routed back into NFS, and then back.  A few
> seconds later and you get a directory listing.  And frankly, I'm not sure
> you want to know what besides http really goes over port 80.

In fact, it's quite easy to tunnel ssh through your http(s) proxy 
(do a google on proxytunnel) and it's most liekly that you can tunnel ssh
over a TLS telnet session, thiogh someone might have to be convinced that
writign such a thing is necesary ;) )

> : original poster:
>> - SSH allows tunneling other protocols, circumventing firewall policies.

        Gerhard,  (faliquid@...all.nl)   == The Acoustic Motorbiker == 	
-- 
   __0	Oh my God, the bomb has just dropped
 =`\<,	And everybody climbed right on top
(=)/(=)	Singing,"What a beautifull country