Post by thread:ftp

No exact or substring matches. trying for part
PICList Thread
'pic ftp '
1993\12\09@153041 by jory

In article <spam_OUTCHq49K.EpMTakeThisOuTnewcastle.ac.uk> S J Harrison, .....S.J.HarrisonKILLspam@spam@newcastle.ac.uk writes: > >There is an FTP site containing PIC software and updates: > >sics.se > >/pub/mchipsoft/

'PIC ftp sites?'
1994\07\07@131154 by trisys

Hi all.. Would someone please post the available FTP sites for PIC information and files? I could not find them in the FAQ. thanks Dave.

'MpK ftp location'
1994\08\17@034445 by crocontroller discussion list

Hello PIC users, I have to make a correction on the ftp location of my MpK source. It's to be found at: ftp.ntb.ch /MicroChip/PIC/MpK Read the *.idx files... regards, Michael

'pic data sheets available via ftp?'
1994\08\18@093022 by crocontroller discussion list

X-cs: From: Self <RZ_NWFS2/GROB> To: PIC-Mailing Liste Subject: data sheets via ftp? Date: Thu, 18 Aug 1994 15:10:39 {now with correct subject, sorry!} hello PICcers all over the world, does anyone know, if the data-sheets of PICs are available via ftp? are they in ascii-format / word-format / postscript? or has anyone good contact to microchip to get the files and post them an a ftp-server? thanks, Siggi grobKILLspamrz_nwfs2.rz.uni-ulm.de

1994\08\18@094303 by crocontroller discussion list

> does anyone know, if the data-sheets of PICs are available via ftp? > are they in ascii-format / word-format / postscript? > > or has anyone good contact to microchip to get the files and post them an a > ftp-server? > I haven't seen any data sheets out on the net, but here is a excellent ftp address: ftp.luth.se Look under the /pub/misc/microchip directory. Yours, Derrick Early, the rookie user

'data sheets of PICs via ftp available?'
1994\08\19@104441 by crocontroller discussion list

hello PICcers all over the world, does anyone know, if the data-sheets of PICs are available via ftp? are they in ascii-format / word-format / postscript? or has anyone good contact to microchip to get the files and post them an a ftp-server? thanks, Siggi .....grobKILLspam.....rz_nwfs2.rz.uni-ulm.de

'pic data sheets available via ftp?'
1994\08\31@052724 by alex

Siggi - unfortunately, Microchip aren't quite in the situation where data sheets are available in any electronic form, let alone on an anonymous ftp site. This is coming, but our MarCom department says it will be into 1995 before anything like this is available - at that time, it is expected a CD-ROM will be made of all the data sheets. Should we (Microchip) not have our own ftp site by then, I'll try to ensure that it's contents get put on some of the ftp sites that I'm supporting (like ftp.sics.se, ftp.funet.fi, ftp.luth.se,...) Rgds -- Alex R. Baker Phone: +44 628 851077 Car: +44 831 494921 Field Applications Engineer Fax: +44 628 850259 Email: EraseMEalexspam_OUTTakeThisOuTmicrochp.demon Arizona Microchip Technology .co.uk

'data sheets of PICs via ftp available?'
1994\08\31@052729 by alex

Please see my earlier, somewhat mis-directed email to this list. Rgds -- Alex R. Baker Phone: +44 628 851077 Car: +44 831 494921 Field Applications Engineer Fax: +44 628 850259 Email: alexspam_OUTmicrochp.demon Arizona Microchip Technology .co.uk

'pic data sheets available via ftp?'
1994\09\01@090326 by alex

In message <@spam@CMM.0.90.2.778357144.billwKILLspamglare.cisco.com> William Chops Westfield writes: > If the documentation gets supplied on CDROM, could you try to assure that > it comes with inherent permission to post the datasheets on networks? > > BillW > > I'll try as hard as poss. - I know the value of the net, even if other poeple in Microchip haven't yet realised it! Rgds -- Alex R. Baker Phone: +44 628 851077 Car: +44 831 494921 Field Applications Engineer Fax: +44 628 850259 Email: KILLspamalexKILLspammicrochp.demon Arizona Microchip Technology .co.uk

'Parallax ftp address'
1994\12\23@204110 by crocontroller discussion list

>Thats great that you have a ftp site now, But, what's the address? >Or, are supposed to click our heels three times to get there? ;-) > >-arC >Arley Carter The basic Parallax address is parallaxinc.com. So, I think the ftp address is ftp.parallaxinc.com. I'm pretty sure this works... ------------------------ Lance Walley --------------------------- Parallax, Inc.

'"2 of N" Keyboard -- web/ftp'
1995\07\27@200048 by Don Lekei

Jory, The pocket logic analyzer application (demo.zip) uses 2-of-N decoding. The source code is available on my bbs or my ftp site. I have been having problems with the BBS computer recently so I am considering shutting down the bbs as it is today. I appologise to any users who have experienced difficulties connecting. In it's place, I am in the process of emulating it on the net! The BBS-style interface page is not ready yet, but it will eventually be connected to my home page: "http://helix.net/~lekei/" Just between you and me, Jory (the rest of you close your eyes)... ;^) The schematics so-far have only been available to registered users, but for the next few days they may be available to anyone at: "ftp://helix.net/helix-users/lekei/" since I haven't yet figured out how to restrict access, or decided if I will just make them publicly available. HARD HAT AREA! Mind the dust. The "virtual bbs" is being built over this weekend. Cheers, -Don -------------------------------------------------------------------------------- "Any sufficiently advanced technology can easily be mistaken for magic" -- Spock Don Lekei -- RemoveMElekeiTakeThisOuTnorsat.com, spamBeGone72677.2623spamBeGonecompuserve.com, TakeThisOuTlekeiEraseMEspam_OUThelix.net Microsat Tech Support -- RemoveME74777.2363TakeThisOuTcompuserve.com On Compuserve -- GO NORSAT Norsat (+Microsat 150) Web Site.."http://www.norsat.com/norsat/" Personal Web Site................"http://helix.net/~lekei/" Mr. CPU's BBS....................(604) 597-3479

'New Web and FTP sites for PIC'
1995\08\18@102142 by Chris Sakkas

We've recently added a PIC page to our web site and a PIC directory to our ftp site. Our web address is: http://www.iglou.com/ITU and our anonymous ftp address is: ftp://iglou.com/members/ITU We also have some files on PC-interfacing and general electronics-related material available via ftp. The support directory will always contain the latest versions of our PIC programmer software. We welcome any user contributed programs to our site. If you would like to share your PIC-related code or utilities with the Internet community, just upload them into our incoming directory and send me an e-mail message with a description of your upload. We would appreciate any comments and suggestions, especially additions or corrections to links on our page. Please keep in mind that we have just added this page and will continue to make updates! Thanks! Chris ---------------------------------------------------------------------- Chris B. Sakkas (csakkasEraseME.....iglou.com) http://www.iglou.com/ITU ITU Technologies (EraseMEITUTecaol.com) ftp://iglou.com/members/ITU Complete PIC programming packages starting at only $29! See our web page or e-mail us today for more info!

'The Circuit Cellar BBS FTPmail WWW page has moved'
1995\09\25@143636 by Lou Sortman

Due to the fact that tfnet.ils.unc.edu is currently not reachable, I have moved my WWW interface to the Circuit Cellar Ink BBS FTPmail server to the following URL. http://sunsite.unc.edu/lou-bin/CCBBS As an added bonus, it is now automatically updated from the BBS three times per week.

'FTP by mail. (was: another request!)'
1995\10\27@162336 by Sheldon Ward

At 08:18 PM 10/23/95 +0330, you wrote: >simulator in http://www.ultranet.com/biz/mchip but i could not >get them .because our INTERNET line in IRAN is very slow(9600 bps). >so i have a new request.may you treat me kindly and send me these programs >by e-mail? if you have in mind to do this kindness please use uuencode >A.Marami There are many computers around the world to do just that! They're called FTP by Mail servers. One is at RemoveMEftpmailEraseMEEraseMESunSITE.Unc.EDU, but you should use one that is close to you. You tell it (via email) where the file is and it will get the file and email it to you. Easy to use. Some sites have long waiting lists but others are very quick. Try it out! Later, Sheldon * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * RemoveMESheldonspam_OUTKILLspamDirect.Ca In beautiful Langley, B.C., Canada * * * * The opinions expressed herein do not necessarily reflect my own. * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * *

'ftp connection'
1995\10\28@161343 by MARAMI%IREARN.bitnet

Hi PIC users, I tried to connect to ftp.parallaxinc.com,but i could not! because it did not accept anonymous or ftp username.do you know why and what shall i enter at username prompt? thanks A.Marami

'ftp site??'
1995\11\06@161241 by Rick Evans

Yes. Try ftp.ultranet.com/biz/mchip Regards, Rick At 12:37 PM 11/6/95 EST, Brad Mitchell wrote: > Is there an ftp site out there for pic'ing around? >regards. > >

1995\11\06@184130 by chris

> Is there an ftp site out there for pic'ing around? > regards. > > We have an anonymous ftp site with some files. New contributions are welcome! Also, check out the pic page on our web site. It has links to several other ftp sites. ftp://itutech.com http://www.itutech.com Chris ---------------------------------------------------------------------- Chris B. Sakkas (RemoveMEchrisTakeThisOuTspamitutech.com) http://www.itutech.com ITU Technologies (EraseMEsalesspamspamBeGoneitutech.com) ftp://itutech.com *** Complete PIC programming packages starting at only $29! *** *** See our web page or e-mail us today for more info! ***

'Microchip BBS ftp site down?'
1996\05\27@174306 by Scott Newell

Hi. Has anyone else had trouble accessing the Microchip BBS site through FTP lately? I can't seem to connect to mchipbbs.microchip.com. Bad IP address. I had a strange MPLAB crash today. Came up with the Project greyed-out on the menu bar. When I clicked on File, the menus for Open Source and the rest went across the full length of the screen. Restarting the program seemed to clear it up, at least until I hit stimulus. Bam, that's the quickest way to exit from MPLAB yet! later, newell

1996\05\28@103539 by Wolfram Liebchen

Scott Newell wrote: > > Hi. > > Has anyone else had trouble accessing the Microchip BBS site through FTP > lately? I can't seem to connect to mchipbbs.microchip.com. Bad IP address. > > > later, > newell ??? That was strange. 5 minutes ago, I tried to FTP Microchip. Worked well, I logged in and browsed the directories, then left FTP. The I remebered, to try TELNET, and I was told, the address-record can not be found. FTP didn't work either?!?! Only two minutes later? Wolfram -- +-----------------------------------------------+ ! Wolfram Liebchen, RemoveMEliebchenKILLspamipserv.ffo.fgan.de ! ! Forschungsinstitut fuer Optik ! ! Schloss Kressbach ! ! D-72072 Tuebingen ! ! Tel: +49 (0)7071 / 709-158 ! ! Fax: +49 (0)7071 / 709-270 (G3 / G4) ! +-----------------------------------------------+

'[OT] How dou YOU ftp'
1998\04\27@194056 by Russell McMahon

I note that many piclisters are running a website. I have just acquired one and need amongst other things to use appropriate ftp software for uploading. Cute ftp is recommended (shareware) but others may know of cheaper (free :-) ) or better solutions. Any comments? Russell apptechSTOPspamspam_OUTclear.net.nz

1998\04\28@114817 by ERIC SCHLAEPFER

>I note that many piclisters are running a website. >I have just acquired one and need amongst other things to use appropriate ftp >software for uploading. Cute ftp is recommended (shareware) but others may >know of cheaper (free :-) ) or better solutions. Any comments? > >Russell > >spamBeGoneapptechSTOPspamEraseMEclear.net.nz Windows NT comes with an FTP program. Try typing "FTP" in a command prompt window. Eric

1998\04\28@131143 by Andy Kunz

>Windows NT comes with an FTP program. Try typing "FTP" in a command prompt >window. I use WS_FTP. It's a freebie out there on the net, and is super-simple to install. Just copy it to a directory and double-click the EXE file. Andy ================================================================== Andy Kunz - Statistical Research, Inc. - Westfield, New Jersey USA ==================================================================

1998\04\28@154303 by Craig Lee

Another REALLY good one is eLEEtFTP , don't ask we why it's called that. It's just like using windows explorer,..... if that's a good thing. Craig {Original Message removed}

1998\04\29@034127 by Neil Strong

Any idea where to get eLEEtFTP? Yahoo, AltaVista and Lycos can't find it. Is it Shareware? Neil. -----Original Message----- From: Craig Lee [SMTP:KILLspamcraigleespamBeGoneTELUSPLANET.NET] Sent: 29 April 1998 08:30 To: EraseMEPICLISTEraseMEMITVMA.MIT.EDU Subject: Re: [OT] How dou YOU ftp Another REALLY good one is eLEEtFTP , don't ask we why it's called that. It's just like using windows explorer,..... if that's a good thing. Craig

1998\04\29@075717 by Alberto Smulders

Windows 95 also comes with the same FTP program (FTP.EXE in directory C:\WINDOWS). By the way, there are many other utility programs for using internet there (TRACERT.EXE, PING.EXE, ......). Regards, Alberto Smulders InSAD - Encarnacion, Paraguay @spam@insad@spam@spam_OUTitacom.com.py -----Mensaje original----- De: Andy Kunz <spamBeGonemtdesignKILLspamFAST.NET> Para: .....PICLISTspam_OUTMITVMA.MIT.EDU <TakeThisOuTPICLIST.....TakeThisOuTMITVMA.MIT.EDU> Fecha: Martes 28 de Abril de 1998 13:13 Asunto: Re: [OT] How dou YOU ftp {Quote hidden}>>Windows NT comes with an FTP program. Try typing "FTP" in a command prompt >>window. > >I use WS_FTP. It's a freebie out there on the net, and is super-simple to >install. Just copy it to a directory and double-click the EXE file. > >Andy > > >================================================================== >Andy Kunz - Statistical Research, Inc. - Westfield, New Jersey USA >==================================================================

1998\04\29@110834 by Wendall Siemens

part 0 701 bytes I tried it out yesterday, and it looks good! Wendall. -----Original Message----- From: Neil Strong [SMTP:TakeThisOuTNeil.StrongKILLspamspamSYNTEGRA.BT.CO.UK] Sent: Wednesday, April 29, 1998 1:42 AM To: .....PICLISTRemoveMEMITVMA.MIT.EDU Subject: Re: [OT] How dou YOU ftp Any idea where to get eLEEtFTP? Yahoo, AltaVista and Lycos can't find it. Is it Shareware? Neil. -----Original Message----- From: Craig Lee [SMTP:RemoveMEcraigleespamBeGoneTELUSPLANET.NET] Sent: 29 April 1998 08:30 To: spamBeGonePICLIST@spam@spam_OUTMITVMA.MIT.EDU Subject: Re: [OT] How dou YOU ftp Another REALLY good one is eLEEtFTP , don't ask we why it's called that. It's just like using windows explorer,..... if that's a good thing. Craig

1998\04\29@162348 by Andy Kunz

Also try FTP Voyager from Rhino Software. http://www.rhinosoft.com It blows away WF_FTP since you can drag and drop stuff so easily. Andy At 08:50 AM 4/29/98 -0600, you wrote: {Quote hidden}>http://www.shareware.com > >I tried it out yesterday, and it looks good! > >Wendall. > >-----Original Message----- >From: Neil Strong [SMTP:TakeThisOuTNeil.StrongspamSYNTEGRA.BT.CO.UK] >Sent: Wednesday, April 29, 1998 1:42 AM >To: PICLISTEraseMEMITVMA.MIT.EDU >Subject: Re: [OT] How dou YOU ftp > >Any idea where to get eLEEtFTP? ================================================================== Andy Kunz - Statistical Research, Inc. - Westfield, New Jersey USA ==================================================================

'똉��: Re: [OT] How dou YOU ftp'
1998\05\01@104944 by Alex Torres

>>I note that many piclisters are running a website. >>I have just acquired one and need amongst other things to use appropriate ftp >>software for uploading. Cute ftp is recommended (shareware) but others may >>know of cheaper (free :-) ) or better solutions. Any comments? >> >>Russell >> >>RemoveMEapptechEraseMEspam_OUTclear.net.nz > >Windows NT comes with an FTP program. Try typing "FTP" in a command prompt >window. All WWW-client program (MS Internet Explorer, Netscape Navigator, etc.) may be used af ftp client, bt it is sence yo use it only to fing a file that you need. Another beautiful program is FAR (File Archive Manager, by E.Roshal, the author of the RAR compressor), it aslo have ftp-client part (good!). I don't remember the FAR's URL, but I hope the search engines helps everybody. To downloading of the files it is better to use Reget, NatVampire, GetRight, etc. program, becouse with the help of this program you can resume downloads after disconnecting (if the server can do this). As for me - I use GetRigth (http://www.headlightsw.com) ================================== Alex Torres, Kharkov, Ukraine (exUSSR) @spam@altorRemoveMEEraseMEgeocities.com 2:461/28 FidoNet http://www.geocities.com/SiliconValley/Lab/6311

'PIC FTP SITE'
1999\03\21@161216 by Wagner Lipnharski

Hi, probably you guys have several PIC FTP sites available, but just in case, I can spare few hundred Megabytes just to make available a Download webpage for PIC routines and or drawings. I already have one for 8051 and another for AVR engines. I just want to hear from your "senior" piclist guys, to avoid to be reinventing the wheel again in creating another filelist. Anyway the space is available. Wagner http://www.ustr.net

'PIC ftp site'
1999\10\11@143811 by Edson Brusque

Hello, There are some "definitive" ftp site for the PIC controllers? If not, how about we create the "Ultimate PIC FTP"? A FTP site with every file about the PIC disponible in the web and the last version of all the shareware/freeware utilities and programmers? Best regards, Brusque ___________________________________________________________________________ | | || |\| | || || |\|\ Edson Brusque :-^= (EraseMEbrusque@spam@flynet.com.br) | | || ||| | || || |||| Musician, Tech Consultant, Programmer, Developer | |_||_||| |_||_||_|||| Rodeio / SC / Brazil / Earth / Solar Syst / Milk... | \_\\_\|| \_\\_\\_\||| Giro In'Italia homepage: http://flynet.com.br/giro | | | | | | | || C.I.Tronics Lighting Designers: citronics.com.br |__|__|__|__|__|__|__||---------------- ICQ# 15937748 --------------------- \__\__\__\__\__\__\__\| The SoundFont Users Group Mailing List is at ----------------------| www.geocities.com/SiliconValley/Port/6619/ ---------------------------------------------------------------------------

'[OT] ftp utilities'
1999\11\11@194302 by John Waters

<x-flowed>Hi all, I need to upload some files to a ftp site regularly. But the operation has to be automatic and under the control of a special application program developed by me. Does anyone know if there is any ftp utilities available that can be called from another program (preferably DOS base)? Thanks in advance. John ______________________________________________________ Get Your Private, Free Email at http://www.hotmail.com </x-flowed>

1999\11\11@200414 by steve

John, most ftp utils include a scripting language that you can include as part of the command line when executing the ftp utility. Steve Wright > {Original Message removed}

1999\11\11@211956 by Mark Willis

Ack, what was the name of the tools in that Nuts & Volts article by Karl Lunt, Drat, let me go look at the SRS site: http://www.seanet.com/~karllunt/autodata.htm, is his unit where he has a Dos box updating his web page regularly. I can pass Cron && FNOS, the utilities he uses, and the FNOS FAQ, to anyone needing them via e-mail. (John, you may not need Cron <G>) Mark John Waters wrote: {Quote hidden}> > Hi all, > > I need to upload some files to a ftp site regularly. But the operation has > to be automatic and under the control of a special application program > developed by me. Does anyone know if there is any ftp utilities available > that can be called from another program (preferably DOS base)? > > Thanks in advance. > John > > ______________________________________________________ > Get Your Private, Free Email at http://www.hotmail.com -- I do small package shipping for small businesses, world-wide.

1999\11\11@221531 by William J. Kitchen

The command line ftp utility that comes with WIN95 and above is scriptable. You invoke it from the command line like this: "ftp -s:myscript.txt" The script file is just a list of what you would normally have typed manually. Here's an example of how someone might synchronize Netscape bookmarks between work and home. open myofficemachine.somedomain.com myusername mypassword cd c:\progra~1\netscape\users\me lcd "c:\progra~1\netscape\users\me get bookmark.htm bye If you want to make the process even easier, you can create a batch file something like the following and call it something like "getbookmarks.bat". This batch passes itself to the ftp program as an argument (the first line is the clever part, notice the %0), so that everything is self contained. The batch interpreter skips the ftp script, and the ftp program generates a couple of harmless error messages, but otherwise safely ignores the lines that aren't part of the ftp script. The batch looks something like this: ftp -s:%0.bat goto done open myofficemachine.somedomain.com myusername mypassword cd c:\progra~1\netscape\users\me lcd "c:\progra~1\netscape\users\me get bookmark.htm bye :done I found this ftp-script-in-a-batch trick on a web site about dos batch files, but I can't remember how to find it again to give proper credit. On 11 Nov 99, at 16:41, John Waters wrote: {Quote hidden}> Hi all, > > I need to upload some files to a ftp site regularly. But the operation has > to be automatic and under the control of a special application program > developed by me. Does anyone know if there is any ftp utilities available > that can be called from another program (preferably DOS base)? > > Thanks in advance. > John > > > > ______________________________________________________ > Get Your Private, Free Email at http://www.hotmail.com > --- Peace, William Kitchen The future is ours to create.

1999\11\12@131134 by John De Villiers

Both Windows NT and Windows 95/98 have commandline FTP clients that can be driven with screipt command file ( ftp -sSCRIPTFILE ) > {Original Message removed}

'[OT] Sample ftp source code'
2000\02\02@124105 by John Waters

<x-flowed>Hi All, I'm developing a program (using MS VC++) that will send data by ftp periodically to a web site. Can anyone provide me with some simple program fragments that perform ftp send/receive functions? Thanks in advance! John ______________________________________________________ Get Your Private, Free Email at http://www.hotmail.com </x-flowed>

2000\02\02@150042 by Erik Reikes

2000\02\02@153817 by Randy Glenn

You could also use the Microsoft Internet Transfer ActiveX control - the one that does HTTP/FTP transfers, not the web browser, and not WinSock. Then, all you have to do is issue commands to the control - not much programming required on your part. -Randy Glenn E-Mail: spamBeGonePICxpertEraseMEyahoo.com Web: http://i.am/PICxpert Currently wondering why I can't get in to Safe Mode - where's a Mac when you need it? {Original Message removed}

2000\02\03@153217 by kayode.ayandokun

At 09:30 AM 2/2/00 -0800, you wrote: >Hi All, > >I'm developing a program (using MS VC++) that will >send data by ftp periodically to a web site. Can >anyone provide me with some simple program fragments >that perform ftp send/receive functions? > >Thanks in advance! > Have a look at the MSVC++ MFC Internet samples. FTPTree is an example program that has the bare bones of what you want to do. It opens an FTP connection, downloads the server's directory structure and displays it in a tree control. The source code is simple to follow and the MFC classes you need to use are used in this example. You just need to call different member functions for uploading data either as a file from disk or directly from memory. The classes are well described in the help topics. Kayode. Dr O. K. Ayandokun, The BlackBoxCamera Company Limited, Unit U7, Lenton Boulevard, Nottingham, NG7 2BY, England. kayode.ayandokunspamBeGonevirgin.net Tel. 0700 2522526 For the latest in home security camera technology and the best ideas for using it visit http://www.blackboxcamera.com

2000\02\03@155719 by John De Villiers

why bother. Just fire up ftp with a command line script ftp -s:scriptfile ( for win95/8 ) and just ftp -sscriptfile ( for NT or unix ) and then scriptfile will contain something like open ftp.peanuts.com user anonymous pass root@ bin mput localfilename remotefilename quit > {Original Message removed}

2000\02\07@131505 by Bill Pierce

<x-flowed>I wouldn't suggest implementing your own FTP transfers. If you really want to the source for WS-FTP (the DOS version) is available and has the routines to do the transfers although it's not pretty. There is an easier way. If you are just doing an in-house project then use Microsoft's stuff thats built in to IE 4 and 5. There are MFC classes to use these, really simple. If you are shipping a product or don't want to use MS stuff buy one of the third party COM components that do it. They don't cost much and they work well. I've used the one from Crecent, look at http://www.componentsource.com for others. Bill {Quote hidden}>From: John Waters <RemoveMEjohn_fm_waters@spam@spamBeGoneHOTMAIL.COM> >Reply-To: pic microcontroller discussion list <.....PICLIST@spam@EraseMEMITVMA.MIT.EDU> >To: .....PICLISTRemoveMEMITVMA.MIT.EDU >Subject: [OT] Sample ftp source code >Date: Wed, 2 Feb 2000 09:30:06 PST > >Hi All, > >I'm developing a program (using MS VC++) that will >send data by ftp periodically to a web site. Can >anyone provide me with some simple program fragments >that perform ftp send/receive functions? > >Thanks in advance! > >John >______________________________________________________ >Get Your Private, Free Email at http://www.hotmail.com ______________________________________________________ Get Your Private, Free Email at http://www.hotmail.com </x-flowed>

2000\02\07@172218 by Bill Pierce

<x-flowed>The only problem with the MS stuff is that you can't ship it unless you ship the entire IE5 installer with it. Bill {Quote hidden}>From: Kayode Ayandokun <.....kayode.ayandokunSTOPspam@spam@VIRGIN.NET> >Reply-To: kayode.ayandokunEraseME@spam@virgin.net >To: RemoveMEPICLISTspamBeGoneMITVMA.MIT.EDU >Subject: [OT] Sample ftp source code >Date: Thu, 3 Feb 2000 20:30:46 +0000 > >At 09:30 AM 2/2/00 -0800, you wrote: > >Hi All, > > > >I'm developing a program (using MS VC++) that will > >send data by ftp periodically to a web site. Can > >anyone provide me with some simple program fragments > >that perform ftp send/receive functions? > > > >Thanks in advance! > > > >Have a look at the MSVC++ MFC Internet samples. FTPTree is an example >program that has the bare bones of what you want to do. It opens an FTP >connection, downloads the server's directory structure and displays it >in a tree control. The source code is simple to follow and the MFC >classes you need to use are used in this example. You just need to call >different member functions for uploading data either as a file from disk >or directly from memory. The classes are well described in the help >topics. > >Kayode. > >Dr O. K. Ayandokun, >The BlackBoxCamera Company Limited, >Unit U7, Lenton Boulevard, >Nottingham, NG7 2BY, >England. >spamBeGonekayode.ayandokunKILLspam@spam@virgin.net >Tel. 0700 2522526 >For the latest in home security camera technology and the >best ideas for using it visit http://www.blackboxcamera.com ______________________________________________________ Get Your Private, Free Email at http://www.hotmail.com </x-flowed>

2000\02\07@192311 by Randy Glenn

The FTP functions are a part of the WinSock library, aren't they? Meaning that no IE is required. -Randy Glenn E-Mail: PICxpertspam_OUT@spam@yahoo.com Web: http://i.am/PICxpert Currently wondering why I can't get in to Safe Mode - where's a Mac when you need it? {Original Message removed}

2000\02\07@193156 by Don Holtz

Hi! No, actually FTP is not part of Winsock. Winsock is for low level IP to IP communications (ie. TCP/UP, UDP, etc). FTP is built on top of the Winsock layer. You can build FTP routines that utilize sockets. If I remember correctly, there is a windows DLL called wininet.dll that DOES contain FTP functions. You are correct that IE is NOT required to do FTP. (Also, there is a DOS FTP command that is nice and easy to use... try it!) Good luck! Sincerely, Don At 07:18 PM 2/7/00 -0500, you wrote: >The FTP functions are a part of the WinSock library, aren't they? Meaning that no IE is >required. > >-Randy Glenn >E-Mail: spamBeGonePICxpert@spam@yahoo.com >Web: http://i.am/PICxpert > >Currently wondering why I can't get in to Safe Mode - where's a Mac when you need it? > >{Original Message removed}

'[OT] Sample ftp source code -> Perl'
2000\02\08@015037 by kohegyi.laszlo

Hi, If you want a nice and free utility, take a look a the Perl. It is very easy to program in this language an ftp (or http) client (even a server is simple). Regards Les >The only problem with the MS stuff is that you can't ship it unless you ship >the entire IE5 installer with it. > >Bill

2000\02\08@035240 by James Cameron

On Tue, Feb 08, 2000 at 07:49:05AM +0100, RemoveMEkohegyi.laszloEraseMEKILLspamLN.MATAV.HU wrote: > If you want a nice and free utility, take a look a the Perl. > It is very easy to program in this language an ftp (or http) client > (even a server is simple). I second that. Perl is also available on most if not all computing platforms, Linux and Microsoft Windows included. Perl is also free, comes with complete source code and documentation, and has a wide community following so that you can ask for help. Compare this to the problems of distributing a package built using proprietary license restricted tools. -- James Cameron spamBeGonequozlspam_OUTRemoveMEus.netrek.org http://quozl.us.netrek.org/

2000\02\08@092155 by Jim Hartmann

I saw some "free" ftp source code here : http://www.freecode.com/internet.html

'[EE]:EFTPOS'
2000\09\27@034226 by Jinx

Does anyone know or have links to EFTPOS comms protocols ? TIA -- http://www.piclist.com#nomail Going offline? Don't AutoReply us! use .....listservRemoveMEmitvma.mit.edu?body=SET%20PICList%20DIGEST

'[PIC]: x modem ftp'
2001\03\15@213642 by Jason L DeVore

I am considering using ftp between a pic and a pc for a project. does anyone know where i can find info on x-modem protocol? Thanks -- http://www.piclist.com hint: The PICList is archived three different ways. See http://www.piclist.com/#archives for details.

2001\03\16@132039 by Paul Hutchinson

There is Xmodem protocol information included with one of our software developer kits. http://www.maximum-inc.com/zip/wmaxsdk.zip You also might want to check out the following book: C Programmer's Guide to Serial Communication (Second Edition) by Joe Campbell Paperback - 992 pages 2nd edition (October 1993) Sams; ISBN: 0672302861 Paul ========================================= Paul Hutchinson Chief Engineer Maximum Inc., 30 Samuel Barnet Blvd. New Bedford, MA 02745 phutchinson@spam@imtra.com http://www.maximum-inc.com ========================================= > I am considering using ftp between a pic and a pc for a project. does > anyone know where i can find info on x-modem protocol? -- http://www.piclist.com#nomail Going offline? Don't AutoReply us! email EraseMElistservRemoveMESTOPspammitvma.mit.edu with SET PICList DIGEST in the body

'[OT]:Multimedia FTP site'
2001\11\10@023454 by Jinx

Dozens of utilities and novelties for MP3, CD, MPEG, EQ, MIDI and audio & video manipulation http://www.jgora.ampr.pl/ftp.html -- http://www.piclist.com hint: The PICList is archived three different ways. See http://www.piclist.com/#archives for details.

'[OT]: Easy FTP tool?'
2002\07\12@210434 by Pic Dude

Porting my web pages from one provider to another, and so far doing it the painful way -- MSDOS prompt, ftp ..., cd..., lcd..., ascii... mget..., bin..., mget..., etc, etc. Ugh! Any of you know a simple ftp tool that will let me do this in a few clicks? Thanks, -Neil. -- http://www.piclist.com hint: The list server can filter out subtopics (like ads or off topics) for you. See http://www.piclist.com/#topics

2002\07\12@212547 by Dale Botkin

CuteFTP... web browser... Dale -- "Curiosity is the very basis of education and if you tell me that curiosity killed the cat, I say only the cat died nobly." - Arnold Edinborough On Fri, 12 Jul 2002, Pic Dude wrote: > Any of you know a simple ftp tool that will let me do this in > a few clicks? -- http://www.piclist.com hint: The list server can filter out subtopics (like ads or off topics) for you. See http://www.piclist.com/#topics

2002\07\12@220616 by Pic Dude

Wow, CuteFTP has really grown up. Last time I saw it, it was a freebie download on zdnet or something like that. Really buggy and weird interface. Just downloaded the eval, and it kicks some major butt now. Site move in progress... Thanks, -Neil. -----Original Message----- From: pic microcontroller discussion list [RemoveMEPICLISTKILLspamTakeThisOuTMITVMA.MIT.EDU]On Behalf Of Dale Botkin CuteFTP... web browser... Dale -- http://www.piclist.com hint: The list server can filter out subtopics (like ads or off topics) for you. See http://www.piclist.com/#topics

2002\07\13@000822 by Marc Joffe

>Smart FTP also works really well. > Its free and has a great interface. -- http://www.piclist.com hint: The PICList is archived three different ways. See http://www.piclist.com/#archives for details.

2002\07\13@023114 by Moreton

I have to say that I stopped using CuteFTP after I discovered it had installed a background process to snoop on my PC's activities and report details back to CuteFTP's website. The only reason I discovered this was that the new process regularly crashed WindowsXP and the XP Blue Screen pointed to a new executable that I hadn't heard of. CuteFTP deinstall routine refused to remove the offending s/w, and I had to download another freeware designed specifically to take out the CuteFTP snooping code. If I remember correctly, the new process is from a media company called 'Aureate' or similar. Search the web for CUTEFTP and SNOOPING and you'll find a lot of detail about this. Regards, Peter {Original Message removed}

2002\07\13@024916 by Pic Dude

Actually, after trying CuteFTP, I was impressed with the progress it has made since I first saw it many years ago. It worked really well to suck down the old site to my computer. And for this one-time use, 30-day trial = free. HOWEVER, I had a problem pushing it back up to the new server. Apparently the new site reports the working directory as d:/..../..../hostname/www/subdir/etc, and CuteFTP has a problem dealing with this. So I just saw this email and installed Smart FTP, but I'm nervous about one thing... it said that it required a new version of Windows Installer, which I let it install, but now it needs me to reboot my computer. Win2k almost never needs a reboot unless some low-level code is being installed, so I'm nervous to re-boot. What are they doing on my computer? Is this a virus in disguise? Yes, I'm a paranoid individual. Cheers, -Neil. {Original Message removed}

2002\07\13@031642 by Pic Dude

Just did a search and you're absolutely right, but I haven't yet found a removal utility. Kerapp! There goes the next few hours. Now I'm really paranoid ... (see my last email from a couple minutes ago). Thanks much. -Neil. {Original Message removed}

2002\07\13@032930 by Dave King

At 02:11 AM 13/07/02 -0500, you wrote: >Just did a search and you're absolutely right, but I haven't >yet found a removal utility. Kerapp! There goes the next >few hours. > >Now I'm really paranoid ... (see my last email from a >couple minutes ago). > >Thanks much. >-Neil. I don't know if it will do it but give Adaware a try. It's pretty good at getting the spy ware out. http://www.lavasoft.com Ithink. Dave -- http://www.piclist.com hint: The PICList is archived three different ways. See http://www.piclist.com/#archives for details.

2002\07\13@052318 by Roman Black

Pic Dude wrote: > > Just did a search and you're absolutely right, but I haven't > yet found a removal utility. Kerapp! There goes the next > few hours. Maybe try FTP explorer, looks something like windows explorer, you can drag and drop files, rename, delete etc. Very handy. -Roman -- http://www.piclist.com hint: The PICList is archived three different ways. See http://www.piclist.com/#archives for details.

2002\07\13@070153 by Diego Sierra

Hi! > Any of you know a simple ftp tool that will let me do this in > a few clicks? My provider suggest me WS-FTP, but I don4t like it too much. If you have MS-Windows you can directly use it from an explorer window, instead of typing a local dir in the address just type your ftp URL: this way ("neil" is your ftp login) it will ask for your password -> ftp://spamBeGoneneil@spam@ftp.myisp.com or you can type the password too -> ftp://neil:RemoveMEmypasswdspam_OUTftp.myisp.com Even you can directly edit the files from your ftp server without downloading them locally (this is managed by the explorer window). Cheers, Diego. -- http://www.piclist.com hint: The PICList is archived three different ways. See http://www.piclist.com/#archives for details.

2002\07\13@094045 by Sergio Masci

Neil If you have remote telnet or ssh access to the host machine (you might know this as login access), log onto the machine, pack the directory tree using tar or zip then download the resulting single file to your local machine then back up to the new host. You might also be able to log onto the new host and directly ftp from the old host onto the new host. Having telnet access to a remote web host gives you so much control over how you manage your web site that it is a prerequisite for any service providers I use. I strongly recommend you assess the value of this capability yourself and choose your new provider accordingly. using tar (with builtin compression): tar zcf new-archive-file-name.tgz existing-directory this will create a compressed tar file called "new-archive-file-name.tgz" containing all the files and sub-directories held in the directory called "existing-directory" using tar (without builtin compression): tar cf new-archive-file-name.tar existing-directory gzip new-archive-file-name.tar The gzip step compresses the tar file AFTER it has been created and renames it to new-archive-file-name.tar.gz Alternatively you might use: tar cf - existing-directory | gzip >new-archive-file-name.tgz winzip knows about extracting files from tar and compressed tar archives. extracting files from a tar archive onto a unix machine is simply done using: tar xf new-archive-file-name.tar or tar zxf new-archive-file-name.tgz or gzip -d new-archive-file-name.tar.gz tar xf new-archive-file-name.tar or gzip -d <new-archive-file-name.tar.gz | tar xf - Hope this helps Regards Sergio {Original Message removed}

2002\07\13@115859 by Rick C.

What's wrong with WS-FTP? I've used it for years. Very professional. It's by far the most stable ftp client I have seen. They have a free demo at: http://www.ipswitch.com I also use their PingPro Pack for internet diagnostics also. Rick Diego Sierra wrote: {Quote hidden}> Hi! > > > Any of you know a simple ftp tool that will let me do this in > > a few clicks? > > My provider suggest me WS-FTP, but I don4t like it too much. > > If you have MS-Windows you can directly use it from an explorer window, > instead of typing a local dir in the address just type your ftp URL: > > this way ("neil" is your ftp login) it will ask for your password -> > ftp://neilspamftp.myisp.com > or you can type the password too -> ftp://neil:spam_OUTmypasswdspam_OUTspam_OUTftp.myisp.com > > Even you can directly edit the files from your ftp server without > downloading them locally (this is managed by the explorer window). > > Cheers, > Diego. > > -- > http://www.piclist.com hint: The PICList is archived three different > ways. See http://www.piclist.com/#archives for details. -- http://www.piclist.com hint: The PICList is archived three different ways. See http://www.piclist.com/#archives for details.

2002\07\13@133216 by Diego Sierra

Hi! > What's wrong with WS-FTP? I've used it for years. Very professional. It's Nothing, it is just I personally do not like it. It was the first one I used a long, very long (maybe when ftp servers starts to grow :-), time ago, and by that time there where others better. I said "I do not like it", no "I do not recommend it" ;-) Cheers, Diego. -- http://www.piclist.com hint: The PICList is archived three different ways. See http://www.piclist.com/#archives for details.

2002\07\13@165830 by Mike Pink

Check out Steve Gibsons site. This little utility has been superseded but I believe the update is listed. http://grc.com/files/optout.exe Mike ----- Original Message ----- From: "Pic Dude" <picdudespam_OUTPILOTTOOLS.COM> To: <RemoveMEPICLISTKILLspam@spam@MITVMA.MIT.EDU> Sent: Saturday, July 13, 2002 8:11 AM Subject: Re: [OT]: Easy FTP tool? {Quote hidden}> Just did a search and you're absolutely right, but I haven't > yet found a removal utility. Kerapp! There goes the next > few hours. > > Now I'm really paranoid ... (see my last email from a > couple minutes ago). > > Thanks much. > -Neil. > > > > {Original Message removed}

'[OT]: FTP woes. Was: RE: [OT]: Easy FTP tool?'
2002\07\13@184711 by Pic Dude

Used WS_FTP in the past, but was never too thrilled about it so I thought I'd look for another. Right now though, the tool is not the problem, but the something else. All tools (Cute, Smart & WS) are stating that this server is not responding in a specific time, so it times out and dies. WS seems to work, but it very unreliable, and very very slow (waiting on the server). But it could be the commands that it's using cause I can ftp, put, cd, pwd fine from a dos prompt. Other servers work fine. I've gone thru the logs and tried their commands explicitly in an MS-DOS ftp session, but it uses commands beyond the "basics" (PASV, STOR, MDTM, etc) which dos ftp doesn't like. [Which is odd, cause I thought it would pass along anything it does not like and let the server respond.] And even though the problem is with the remote site, I know what tech support will say -- if I can get to it with MS-DOS ftp, then my SW is bad Anyone have any clues as to how to diagnose/resolve this? Cheers, -Neil. {Original Message removed}

2002\07\13@190130 by Jennifer L. Gatza

Tell us more about the server. I wonder if it is configured not to use certain verbs that these FTP programs use. (e.g., PASV, which can really compromise a server's security) > Other servers work fine. Jen -- http://www.piclist.com hint: The PICList is archived three different ways. See http://www.piclist.com/#archives for details.

2002\07\13@203057 by Pic Dude

So far all I know is that it is IIS on Win2k. Provider is http://www.avehost.com . I'm going thru the logs/commands now to see what they're really trying to do. The logs don't show a problem with PASV, but FEAT reports an error. This should not be a problem though, as it must be asking for the feature list to know what commands it can use, and if not, it should default to some primitive basics. I'll dig around the provider support area and see what else I can find on the servers. In the meanwhile, I left WS_FTP running for the last hour+ and it seems to have uploaded most of the site w/o croaking. But I need a solution for the next time, which there will definitely be. Cheers, -Neil. {Original Message removed}

2002\07\13@210513 by Pic Dude

Ding, ding, ding! We have a winner! Since my last email about 15 mins ago, I found this page http://www.slacksite.com/other/ftp.html , which explained passive vs. active quite well. I switched WS to active and it hauls butt now. And Cute works now. Still haven't figured out how to get SmartFTP into active mode... and that's the one I want to keep. There must be a way and I'll find it. Thanks much, -Neil. {Original Message removed}

'[OT]: Solved. Was: RE: [OT]: FTP woes. Was: R'
2002\07\13@212201 by Pic Dude

I said: > Still haven't figured out how to get SmartFTP into > active mode... and that's the one I want to keep. > There must be a way and I'll find it. Just found it under Tools/Settings/Connections. Works like a charm. Much thanks everyone. -Neil. {Original Message removed}

'[OT]: Easy FTP tool?'
2002\07\13@235757 by Marc Joffe

You do not need to worry about the installer upgrade. I work at a software firm that only allows staff to use software that the IT department approves and Smart FTP is one of those products. Marc At 01:43 AM 13/07/2002 -0500, you wrote: {Quote hidden}>Actually, after trying CuteFTP, I was impressed with the >progress it has made since I first saw it many years ago. >It worked really well to suck down the old site to my >computer. And for this one-time use, 30-day trial = free. > >HOWEVER, I had a problem pushing it back up to the new >server. Apparently the new site reports the working >directory as d:/..../..../hostname/www/subdir/etc, and >CuteFTP has a problem dealing with this. > >So I just saw this email and installed Smart FTP, but I'm >nervous about one thing... it said that it required a new >version of Windows Installer, which I let it install, but >now it needs me to reboot my computer. Win2k almost >never needs a reboot unless some low-level code is being >installed, so I'm nervous to re-boot. What are they doing >on my computer? Is this a virus in disguise? > >Yes, I'm a paranoid individual. > >Cheers, >-Neil. -- http://www.piclist.com hint: The PICList is archived three different ways. See http://www.piclist.com/#archives for details.

2002\07\14@023310 by Tal Dayan

My recommendation to you is don't touch Cute FTP. I used registered version of Cute FTP for and upgraded it from time to time. Last time I tried to upgrade they sent me a version spies on you and inform their servers about your installations. Further more, if you install it more than a certain number of times, you will not be able to install any more. Needless to say that I asked for a refund and don't touch this software anymore. If my computer crashes and I need to reinstall all the programs, the last thing I am looking for is having to call a vendor and ask them to enable the installation. My recommendation to you is to use a software that you can 'own' without having to be depend on favors from the vendor (assuming they are still in business when you need them). Tal > {Original Message removed}

2002\07\14@203228 by Dale Botkin

Well... damn. I didn't know CuteFTP had this sort of thing now. It's been a few years since I used it -- I have no need for FTP clients with a GUI now, but I know a lot of people use it. It also completely slipped my mind to point out that you could use the regular old command line FTP -- even from Winblows -- and just use MPUT and MGET along with PROMPT to quickly and easily send entire directories. That's what I usually do, but it's just like reflex now and sometimes it doesn't occur to me that not everyone knows you can do that. Dale -- "Curiosity is the very basis of education and if you tell me that curiosity killed the cat, I say only the cat died nobly." - Arnold Edinborough On Sat, 13 Jul 2002, Tal Dayan wrote: > My recommendation to you is don't touch Cute FTP. -- http://www.piclist.com#nomail Going offline? Don't AutoReply us! email listservspamBeGone.....mitvma.mit.edu with SET PICList DIGEST in the body

2002\07\14@234738 by Tal Dayan

BTW, looks like SmartFTP also don't let you 'own' the softwre you install and use and keep you depend on their good will and future business model changes. Take a look at http://smartftp.com/support/kb/?a=view&id=40 As for GUI, the nice thing is that it shows you the progress of downloading large files (just downloaded 5 CD's of RedHat 7.3 distribution). Last time I checked all you get with the standard text clients is a bunch of hash '#' chars ;-). Also, some of them support persistante download queue with automatic resume. Tal > {Original Message removed}

2002\07\15@001914 by Dale Botkin

Well... if you want a perfect solution, try your favorite flavor of UNIX (BSD, Solaris, Linux, whatever -- dare I add OS/X?) with ncftp. Progress meter, auto resume, all kinds of neat stuff. 8-) Dale -- "Curiosity is the very basis of education and if you tell me that curiosity killed the cat, I say only the cat died nobly." - Arnold Edinborough On Sun, 14 Jul 2002, Tal Dayan wrote: > As for GUI, the nice thing is that it shows you the progress of downloading > large files (just downloaded 5 CD's of RedHat 7.3 distribution). Last time I > checked all you get with the standard text clients is a bunch of hash '#' > chars ;-). > > Also, some of them support persistante download queue with automatic resume. -- http://www.piclist.com hint: To leave the PICList KILLspampiclist-unsubscribe-request.....mitvma.mit.edu

2002\07\15@023821 by Tal Dayan

Tried it on my Linux box. Very nice indeed, automatic login, command line completion, background transfer, bookmarks, ETA, transfer rate and progress indication though no percentage. I was not even aware it was there all that time. Thanks, Tal > {Original Message removed}

2002\07\15@081203 by Dale Botkin

Once upon a time I ran a local ISP... the developer (Mike Gleason) was a customer of mine, and my UNIX guy was a friend of his. We used it a lot, of course... Dale -- "Curiosity is the very basis of education and if you tell me that curiosity killed the cat, I say only the cat died nobly." - Arnold Edinborough On Sun, 14 Jul 2002, Tal Dayan wrote: > Tried it on my Linux box. Very nice indeed, automatic login, command line > completion, background transfer, bookmarks, ETA, transfer rate and progress > indication though no percentage. > > I was not even aware it was there all that time. -- http://www.piclist.com hint: To leave the PICList spam_OUTpiclist-unsubscribe-requestKILLspammitvma.mit.edu

2002\07\15@132442 by Peter L. Peres

On Sun, 14 Jul 2002, Tal Dayan wrote: >BTW, looks like SmartFTP also don't let you 'own' the softwre you install >and use and keep you depend on their good will and future business model >changes. > >Take a look at http://smartftp.com/support/kb/?a=view&id=40 > >As for GUI, the nice thing is that it shows you the progress of downloading >large files (just downloaded 5 CD's of RedHat 7.3 distribution). Last time I >checked all you get with the standard text clients is a bunch of hash '#' >chars ;-). To avoid getting the '#' chars put a dash before the user name (i.e. -anonymous instead of anonymous) (depends on site). Peter -- http://www.piclist.com hint: To leave the PICList RemoveMEpiclist-unsubscribe-requestRemoveMEEraseMEmitvma.mit.edu

'[OT]: FTP software revisited...'
2002\07\22@160937 by Pic Dude

Just spoke with the folks at CuteFTP who claim that their product has not had any spyware or adware since version 2.6. Can anyone prove this wrong? Cheers, -Neil. -- http://www.piclist.com hint: The list server can filter out subtopics (like ads or off topics) for you. See http://www.piclist.com/#topics

2002\07\22@162628 by Tom Messenger

At 03:08 PM 7/22/02 -0500, you wrote: >Just spoke with the folks at CuteFTP who claim that their product has not >had any >spyware or adware since version 2.6. Can anyone prove this wrong? No, not me. But knowing that they did in the past is a good reason to never use their products now or in the future. Just my opinion. As for everyone else, your mileage may vary. > >Cheers, >-Neil. > -- http://www.piclist.com hint: The list server can filter out subtopics (like ads or off topics) for you. See http://www.piclist.com/#topics

2002\07\22@164012 by Pic Dude

Agreed. I did remove the trial version I had from a week ago, but wanted to know if to invest the time in downloading ad- removal programs etc. That in itself worries me. Cheers, -Neil "just call me Mr. Paranoid" N. {Original Message removed}

2002\07\22@191316 by Dave King

At 03:38 PM 22/07/02 -0500, you wrote: >Agreed. I did remove the trial version I had from a week ago, >but wanted to know if to invest the time in downloading ad- >removal programs etc. That in itself worries me. > >Cheers, >-Neil "just call me Mr. Paranoid" N. Get Adware, it will open your eyes to how much junk they hide on webpages. And there are a few spywares that you won't be able to remove without it. Kazaa is one. If you get rid of it by hand you usually toast your winsock setup and have to reinstall. Adaware does it in a minute with no damage. Used it on a computer and it found 380 spy programs. They were just about to replace their "slow" computer. Ran about 10x faster afterwards. Run it once a week or more with your antivirus. It's a good thing. Dave -- http://www.piclist.com hint: The list server can filter out subtopics (like ads or off topics) for you. See http://www.piclist.com/#topics

2002\07\22@225711 by Rex Byrns

Just today I installed FileZilla from sourceforge.net. It worked great all day. I have to work on a site that must share their ftp server with 40000 sites because more programs time out. I have tried cuteftp, wsftp (it was ok, but shareware message gets old), and powerdesk. All of them failed to juggle the timeout errors. FileZilla was free, installed on win2k great and no spyware at all. I prefer Linux but sometimes don't have a choice. {Original Message removed}

2002\07\23@033534 by Pic Dude

Holy kerappp....380 spy programs!?!?!? I'm amazed that these can get onto a computer w/o being intercepted by the Virus trapper. I might have to try it just to see what it comes up with on my computer. I'm one of those nervous types who knows that I don't know enough about this to feel safe. So with the fear of viruses, spyware, and installing anything on my machine that I'm not super-familiar with (such as this adware), I usually use the best sure-fire method of system cleanup that I know -- I reinstall the OS every 30-60 days. Yes, I actually do. However, I do have a (non-critical) app that requires that re-registration everytime it's installed, and there is lots of red-tape when it's been installed previously -- I have to call and explain myself and beg. Cheers, -Neil. -----Original Message----- Get Adware, ... Used it on a computer and it found 380 spy programs. ... Dave -- http://www.piclist.com hint: The PICList is archived three different ways. See http://www.piclist.com/#archives for details.

2002\07\23@062553 by Andy Reynolds

Hi dude, you could re-install the OS plus your normal progs and then take a snapshot of your windows /prog files /root dir using the free xxcopy (or probably lots of other utilities) then every 30-60 days just copy the snapshot in and start afresh.... Andy ----- Original Message ----- From: "Pic Dude" <KILLspampicdudespamBeGonePILOTTOOLS.COM> To: <PICLISTspamMITVMA.MIT.EDU> Sent: Tuesday, July 23, 2002 8:32 AM Subject: Re: [OT]: FTP software revisited... {Quote hidden}> Holy kerappp....380 spy programs!?!?!? I'm amazed that these > can get onto a computer w/o being intercepted by the Virus > trapper. I might have to try it just to see what it comes > up with on my computer. > > I'm one of those nervous types who knows that I don't know > enough about this to feel safe. So with the fear of viruses, > spyware, and installing anything on my machine that I'm not > super-familiar with (such as this adware), I usually use the > best sure-fire method of system cleanup that I know -- I > reinstall the OS every 30-60 days. Yes, I actually do. > However, I do have a (non-critical) app that requires > that re-registration everytime it's installed, and there is > lots of red-tape when it's been installed previously -- I > have to call and explain myself and beg. > > Cheers, > -Neil. > > > > -----Original Message----- > > Get Adware, > ... > > Used it on a computer and it found 380 spy programs. > ... > > Dave > > -- > http://www.piclist.com hint: The PICList is archived three different > ways. See http://www.piclist.com/#archives for details. > > -- http://www.piclist.com hint: The PICList is archived three different ways. See http://www.piclist.com/#archives for details.

'[PIC]need a public ftp to transfer some MB file.'
2002\09\26@043840 by personal

-- http://www.piclist.com hint: The PICList is archived three different ways. See http://www.piclist.com/#archives for details.

'[OT:]FTP or HTTP'
2004\08\19@065052 by zantos

Anyone have the merits of uploading large file to a web server using FTP or HTTP? I understand MS prefer HTTP as it easier due to firewalls issues. Is this correct? Any URL discussing this difference? TIA z -- http://www.piclist.com hint: PICList Posts must start with ONE topic: [PIC]:,[SX]:,[AVR]: ->uP ONLY! [EE]:,[OT]: ->Other [BUY]:,[AD]: ->Ads

2004\08\19@070715 by William Chops Westfield

On Aug 19, 2004, at 3:48 AM, zantos wrote: > Anyone have the merits of uploading large file to a web server using > FTP or HTTP? I understand MS prefer HTTP as it easier due to firewalls > issues. Is this correct? Sounds right. FTP uses a separate tcp connection for the data transfer, whose endpoint port numbers are (potentially) negotiated and opened from the 'wrong' end of the connection. They both squirt the data down a single tcp connection, so performance should be similar (although ftp may optimize window sizes for bulk data in ways that http doesn't, that's probably relatively uncommon.) BillW -- http://www.piclist.com hint: PICList Posts must start with ONE topic: [PIC]:,[SX]:,[AVR]: ->uP ONLY! [EE]:,[OT]: ->Other [BUY]:,[AD]: ->Ads

2004\08\19@072000 by Alan B. Pearce

> Anyone have the merits of uploading large file to a web server using > FTP or HTTP? I understand MS prefer HTTP as it easier due to firewalls > issues. Is this correct? I suspect that the preference is more to do with dealing with things like proxy servers, fire walls, and presenting a common interface to the user, than any specific performance issue. After all Internet Exploder knows about FTP, you can open FTP pages, and it shows it suitably on the screen as a directory listing, and it downloads from an FTP server. -- http://www.piclist.com hint: PICList Posts must start with ONE topic: [PIC]:,[SX]:,[AVR]: ->uP ONLY! [EE]:,[OT]: ->Other [BUY]:,[AD]: ->Ads

2004\08\19@075732 by Howard Winter

Alan, On Thu, 19 Aug 2004 12:20:33 +0100, Alan B. Pearce wrote: > > Anyone have the merits of uploading large file to a web server using > > FTP or HTTP? I understand MS prefer HTTP as it easier due to firewalls > > issues. Is this correct? > > I suspect that the preference is more to do with dealing with things like > proxy servers, fire walls, and presenting a common interface to the user, > than any specific performance issue. Indeed - MS aren't the least interested in performance, it's the hassle factor that firewalls may stop FTP unless you specifically allow them to pass it, plus the "Active" mode needs to allow a negotiated (unpredictable) high-numbered port through - passive mode doesn't, but it's not usually the default. In my own experience, FTP is slightly faster than HTTP from the same server. Not enough to matter, but it's not nothing! > After all Internet Exploder knows about > FTP, you can open FTP pages, and it shows it suitably on the screen as a > directory listing, and it downloads from an FTP server. Yes but it's using FTP in this case, even though it's an HTML browser! The thing that I like about FTP is that it's restartable if interrupted (given that the software at both ends needs to support this) and even on my ADSL line it takes nearly 3 hours to download a CD image, so restartability can be very handy! :-) Cheers, Howard Winter St.Albans, England -- http://www.piclist.com hint: PICList Posts must start with ONE topic: [PIC]:,[SX]:,[AVR]: ->uP ONLY! [EE]:,[OT]: ->Other [BUY]:,[AD]: ->Ads

2004\08\19@104859 by Harold Hallikainen

I like using sftp for file uploads since ftp sends usernames and passwords in the clear. I have only port 23 (ssh) open on my router and am able to use sftp to transfer files in and out. Works well for me! Harold {Quote hidden}> On Aug 19, 2004, at 3:48 AM, zantos wrote: > >> Anyone have the merits of uploading large file to a web server using >> FTP or HTTP? I understand MS prefer HTTP as it easier due to firewalls >> issues. Is this correct? > > Sounds right. FTP uses a separate tcp connection for the data > transfer, whose endpoint port numbers are (potentially) negotiated and > opened from the 'wrong' end of the connection. They both squirt the > data down a single tcp connection, so performance should be similar > (although ftp may optimize window sizes for bulk data in ways that http > doesn't, that's probably relatively uncommon.) > > BillW -- FCC Rules Online at http://www.hallikainen.com -- http://www.piclist.com hint: PICList Posts must start with ONE topic: [PIC]:,[SX]:,[AVR]: ->uP ONLY! [EE]:,[OT]: ->Other [BUY]:,[AD]: ->Ads

'=?utf-8?b?UkU6IFtPVF0gR2V0dGluZyBpbnRvIGJ1c2luZXNz'
2005\01\12@051229 by Wouter van Ooijen

> What if James would wish to make more business based on > PICList? What would be the options? Translation? For whom? In my experience web presence is not *directly* exploitable, but indirectly might be an option. Consultancy might not be directly related to web presence, but the web presence will surely draw attention. Wouter van Ooijen -- ------------------------------------------- Van Ooijen Technische Informatica: http://www.voti.nl consultancy, development, PICmicro products docent Hogeschool van Utrecht: http://www.voti.nl/hvu

'=?utf-8?b?UmU6IFtPVF0gR2V0dGluZyBpbnRvIGJ1c2luZXNz'
2005\01\27@194353 by Mike Singer

Wouter van Ooijen wrote: > > What if James would wish to make more business > > based on PICList? What would be the options? > > Translation? For whom? > > In my experience web presence is not *directly* exploitable, > but indirectly might be an option. Consultancy might not be > directly related to web presence, but the web presence will > surely draw attention. Perhaps personal experience is not the best and the only advisor sometimes. Perhaps some kind of personal "blue dream" could work better. I think this thing (backed by hard work) makes a difference between those who stayed to live in Europe and those who emigrated to North America chasing their personal "blue dream" (no sarcasm). Have a look at mentioned ProZ. They use to do nothing but just some sort of mediation between translators all over the world and translation agencies. Multiply the price of platinum membership by the number of platinum members add advertisements and you'll get some hundreds of thousands of $US per year. But the translation is not the "blue dream" anymore since it got implemented already. Maybe EE consultancy and design could be the options. The idea is to make paid membership be profitable to members. This involves a lot of hard work to a site holder without him being guaranteed of success. Best Regards, Mike.

'[OT] Recommendations sought for FTP & POP3 servers'
2005\02\16@172228 by Russell McMahon

Have just ventured into the new (for me) world of running a website from own LAN. Trial page here (*very* slow uplink )(just a randomish collection of pictures at present). http://www.russell.servepics.com Server is the free and marvellous Apache 2 running on Windows XP home. Requirement: 1. I'm looking for recommendations for an FTP server to allow both upload and download of web content, also running on Windows. Ideally it would be the same price as Apache (ie free) but for-money products OK if there's an excellent reason to use them. Ideally would run on all flavours of Windows. Would consider using Linux in due course (of course) but at present Windows is what's available and easy for me. Aims are: works, easy to install and run, no surprises. I could Google on this (and have) BUT "the eyes and brain of the PICList" are liable to be able to identify a far better solution that I am liable to by myself. [eg Googling: "ftp server" freeware gives 8000 hits including eg http://www.gold-software.com/ThePersonalFTPServer-review8282.htm]. 2. Also possibly a POP3 email server, although that, as far as I understand it, may need special external support and can not be a totally free solution. Getting Apache running was surprisingly painless (only a little blood and sweat and no tears)(fighting the router/firewall was the greatest hurdle). If adding FTP access (and possibly email) is as easy I can see the possibly of writing it up as an integrated procedure for others. Russell McMahon

2005\02\16@173356 by Neil Cherry

Russel please check into sftp instead of ftp. The S is for secure and I'm sure there's a Windows version (freeware probably). -- Linux Home Automation Neil Cherry RemoveMEncherryspamBeGoneRemoveMEcomcast.net http://home.comcast.net/~ncherry/ (Text only) http://hcs.sourceforge.net/ (HCS II) http://linuxha.blogspot.com/ My HA Blog

2005\02\16@175917 by Rolf

Russell McMahon wrote: {Quote hidden}> Have just ventured into the new (for me) world of running a website > from own LAN. > Trial page here (*very* slow uplink )(just a randomish collection of > pictures at present). > > http://www.russell.servepics.com > > Server is the free and marvellous Apache 2 running on Windows XP home. > > Requirement: > > 1. I'm looking for recommendations for an FTP server to allow both > upload and download of web content, also running on Windows. Ideally > it would be the same price as Apache (ie free) but for-money products > OK if there's an excellent reason to use them. Ideally would run on > all flavours of Windows. Would consider using Linux in due course (of > course) but at present Windows is what's available and easy for me. > Aims are: works, easy to install and run, no surprises. > > I could Google on this (and have) BUT "the eyes and brain of the > PICList" are liable to be able to identify a far better solution that > I am liable to by myself. [eg Googling: "ftp server" freeware gives > 8000 hits including eg > http://www.gold-software.com/ThePersonalFTPServer-review8282.htm]. > > 2. Also possibly a POP3 email server, although that, as far as I > understand it, may need special external support and can not be a > totally free solution. > > Getting Apache running was surprisingly painless (only a little blood > and sweat and no tears)(fighting the router/firewall was the greatest > hurdle). If adding FTP access (and possibly email) is as easy I can > see the possibly of writing it up as an integrated procedure for others. > > > > Russell McMahon > Hmmmm Linux is my friend.... but still. Regardless of your intended OS, you will find that FTP is very "blood sweat and teard" when behind a firewall. The FTP protocol requires 2 socket connections between client and host. The problems is that the "old" way of doing things was to have a "control" connection FROM client TO server, and then a data connection FROM server TO client. This presents a great deal of frustration if the Client is "Natted" behind a firewall (the firewall will block the incomming data connection (well, most do). The "new way" is to use "passive FTP", where the client makes the data connection from the Client to the Server. The problem here is that the Server's firewall will block the new data connection. You need to have a fancier-than-most firewall on your server side to manage FTP. Do some research. Rolf

2005\02\16@182022 by Bob Blick

Pure-FTPD has been ported to windows: http://www.pureftpd.org/windows/ -Bob

2005\02\16@185425 by John Mullan

Hi Bob. I personally use "Internet Anywhere eMail Server". I use "Serv-U" FTP server. While both work very well, the version of Serv-U I am using is WAY outta date. But I'm sure their current offerings are great as well. Visit: http://www.serv-u.com for the FTP Server http://www.tnsoftware.com for the email (pop3, smtp) server. Cheers, -----Original Message----- From: KILLspampiclist-bouncesspamBeGoneMIT.EDU [@spam@piclist-bouncesSTOPspam@spam@MIT.EDU]On Behalf Of Bob Blick Sent: Wednesday, February 16, 2005 6:20 PM To: Microcontroller discussion list - Public. Subject: Re: [OT] Recommendations sought for FTP & POP3 servers Pure-FTPD has been ported to windows: http://www.pureftpd.org/windows/ -Bob

2005\02\16@185747 by Bradley Ferguson

On Thu, 17 Feb 2005 11:22:16 +1300, Russell McMahon <apptechspamBeGonespamBeGoneparadise.net.nz> wrote: > Have just ventured into the new (for me) world of running a website > from own LAN. > Trial page here (*very* slow uplink )(just a randomish collection of > pictures at present). > > http://www.russell.servepics.com > > Server is the free and marvellous Apache 2 running on Windows XP home. You may want to consider whether this is really cost-effective as you have to keep up with software updates for your system when you expose it to the outside world like this. I know that most Linux distributions require a bit of work up front to secure them and I just plain don't trust Windows. Of course, if you do actually have a lot of pictures maybe this will work out for you in the long run without having to pay for hosting + disk space. Just a consideration Bradley

2005\02\16@193021 by Russell McMahon

> Pure-FTPD has been ported to windows: > http://www.pureftpd.org/windows/ Thanks. I note that there is no mention whatsoever on the home page of Windows and that the Windows distro files are mid to late 2002. Apart from that it looks excellent. Russell McMahon

2005\02\16@193555 by Russell McMahon

> You may want to consider whether this is really cost-effective as > you > have to keep up with software updates for your system when you > expose > it to the outside world like this. I know that most Linux > distributions require a bit of work up front to secure them and I > just > plain don't trust Windows. Nor I. But I keep all mine right up to date with auto update. Not perfect, but as close as Microsoft can get at any moment. > Of course, if you do actually have a lot > of pictures 50,000+ :-) But most would not be on the website. But being able to easily move what I want to on and off and having essentially unlimited capacity when wanted are substantial attractions. Bandwidth is my overwhelming limit. > maybe this will work out for you in the long run without > having to pay for hosting + disk space. The FTP server requirement is so a limited number of others can share the website capability remotely. Volume and traffic would be low. These would only be applications where being on my system would add value. RM

2005\02\16@204948 by Carey Fisher - NCS

I'm quite fond of Cerberus FTP program (http://www.cerberusftp.com) and it's free. Here's the description from their website: Cerberus FTP ServerTM provides powerful, multithreaded FTP server performance without sacrificing ease-of-use. Designed to use very little CPU and memory, Cerberus features a user-friendly interface that can be easily hidden or accessed from the system tray. The server is able to listen for connections on multiple interfaces (Multi-homed PCs), run as an NT service, resume failed transfers, and offers an easy-to-use manager for controlling user access to files and file operations. Connection limit, timeout, and IP access can be controlled by the administrator as well as a variety of other settings. In addition, Cerberus FTP Server offers statistics on connections as well as robust logging capabilities. The server adheres to RFC959 and RFC1123. This product is "free for personal use and not-for-profit charitable organizations". I find it works quite well. Carey

2005\02\16@234637 by Herbert Graf

On Thu, 2005-02-17 at 11:22 +1300, Russell McMahon wrote: > Have just ventured into the new (for me) world of running a website > from own LAN. > Trial page here (*very* slow uplink )(just a randomish collection of > pictures at present). > > http://www.russell.servepics.com > > Server is the free and marvellous Apache 2 running on Windows XP home. > > Requirement: > > 1. I'm looking for recommendations for an FTP server to allow both > upload and download of web content, also running on Windows. Ideally > it would be the same price as Apache (ie free) but for-money products > OK if there's an excellent reason to use them. Ideally would run on > all flavours of Windows. Would consider using Linux in due course (of > course) but at present Windows is what's available and easy for me. > Aims are: works, easy to install and run, no surprises. Any chance you're open to switching to Linux instead? Most distros have all that by default, no searching needed. TTYL ----------------------------- Herbert's PIC Stuff: http://repatch.dyndns.org:8383/pic_stuff/

2005\02\17@003749 by Russell McMahon

>> Would consider using Linux in due course (of course) >> but at present Windows is what's available and easy for me. > Any chance you're open to switching to Linux instead? Most distros > have > all that by default, no searching needed. TTYL As I said, long term it is an obvious thing to look at. Right now it would be a major learning curve addition that i could do without. If it had not been for some router / firewall issues I would have had Apache running from go to whoa in under an hour. amazingly friendly The "Windows distro" also has it by default :-) - and but there are so many options just a Google away that I was seeking the voices of experience. It's been suggested that operating from behind a firewall is going to cause me some ftp headaches and/or run the risk of opening up my security somewhat. We'll see. RM

2005\02\17@050259 by ThePicMan

At 17.33 2005.02.16 -0500, you wrote: >Russel please check into sftp instead of ftp. The S is for secure >and I'm sure there's a Windows version which someway contraddicts the "S". ;)

2005\02\17@093123 by Howard Winter

Russell, On Thu, 17 Feb 2005 11:22:16 +1300, Russell McMahon wrote: > Have just ventured into the new (for me) world of running a website > from own LAN. > Trial page here (*very* slow uplink )(just a randomish collection of > pictures at present). > > http://www.russell.servepics.com Looks good - wasn't unusually slow, some nice pictures. But why is there apparently a dragon flying along behind the pictures at the top? :-) Cheers, Howard Winter St.Albans, England

2005\02\17@111354 by jrem

www.pablovandermeer.nl/downloads.html the ftp server works great, no probs. I haven't upgraded since 1.77, though. Can't help on the pop, but I'll be watching . . . --- Russell McMahon <spamBeGoneapptechparadise.net.nz> wrote: {Quote hidden}> Have just ventured into the new (for me) world of running a website > from own LAN. > Trial page here (*very* slow uplink )(just a randomish collection of > pictures at present). > > http://www.russell.servepics.com > > Server is the free and marvellous Apache 2 running on Windows XP > home. > > Requirement: > > 1. I'm looking for recommendations for an FTP server to allow both > > upload and download of web content, also running on Windows. Ideally > it would be the same price as Apache (ie free) but for-money products > > OK if there's an excellent reason to use them. Ideally would run on > all flavours of Windows. Would consider using Linux in due course (of > > course) but at present Windows is what's available and easy for me. > Aims are: works, easy to install and run, no surprises. > > I could Google on this (and have) BUT "the eyes and brain of the > PICList" are liable to be able to identify a far better solution that > > I am liable to by myself. [eg Googling: "ftp server" freeware gives > 8000 hits including eg > http://www.gold-software.com/ThePersonalFTPServer-review8282.htm]. > > 2. Also possibly a POP3 email server, although that, as far as I > understand it, may need special external support and can not be a > totally free solution. > > Getting Apache running was surprisingly painless (only a little blood > > and sweat and no tears)(fighting the router/firewall was the greatest > > hurdle). If adding FTP access (and possibly email) is as easy I can > see the possibly of writing it up as an integrated procedure for > others. > > > > Russell McMahon > > -

2005\02\17@123314 by Aaron

> > >Looks good - wasn't unusually slow, some nice pictures. But why is there apparently a dragon flying along >behind the pictures at the top? :-) > >Cheers, > > >Howard Winter >St.Albans, England > > > > I second what Howard said. Where did you shoot the windmills? Looks like some I've seen in California between San Francisco and Modesto. A short blurb about each photo would be neat. :) Aaron

2005\02\17@140711 by Peter L. Peres

On Thu, 17 Feb 2005, Russell McMahon wrote: {Quote hidden}>>> Would consider using Linux in due course (of course) >>> but at present Windows is what's available and easy for me. > >> Any chance you're open to switching to Linux instead? Most distros have >> all that by default, no searching needed. TTYL > > As I said, long term it is an obvious thing to look at. > Right now it would be a major learning curve addition that i could do > without. > If it had not been for some router / firewall issues I would have had Apache > running from go to whoa in under an hour. > amazingly friendly > > The "Windows distro" also has it by default :-) - and but there are so many > options just a Google away that I was seeking the voices of experience. > > It's been suggested that operating from behind a firewall is going to cause > me some ftp headaches and/or run the risk of opening up my security somewhat. > We'll see. You can force the ftp server to accept only passive ftp requests by default. That can cause troubles for the users who can't use that. Peter

2005\02\17@154402 by Russell McMahon

>> http://www.russell.servepics.com > > Looks good - wasn't unusually slow, some nice pictures. But why is > there apparently a dragon flying along > behind the pictures at the top? :-) Because it can ? :-) That was a Picasa logo. I was just demonstrating to a visitor that it was a GIF that could be changed to an animated one. RM

2005\02\17@213749 by Nate Duehr

Russell McMahon wrote: > Have just ventured into the new (for me) world of running a website > from own LAN. > Trial page here (*very* slow uplink )(just a randomish collection of > pictures at present). > > http://www.russell.servepics.com > > Server is the free and marvellous Apache 2 running on Windows XP home. Yay Apache! {Quote hidden}> > Requirement: > > 1. I'm looking for recommendations for an FTP server to allow both > upload and download of web content, also running on Windows. Ideally > it would be the same price as Apache (ie free) but for-money products > OK if there's an excellent reason to use them. Ideally would run on > all flavours of Windows. Would consider using Linux in due course (of > course) but at present Windows is what's available and easy for me. > Aims are: works, easy to install and run, no surprises. What? Your OS of choice doesn't come with a good FTP server? And you pay how much for it?? ;-) (GRIN) To be honest, I haven't done servers on Windows in so long I don't have much input on what to use for FTP... However a couple of comments on the general "plan" below... > 2. Also possibly a POP3 email server, although that, as far as I > understand it, may need special external support and can not be a > totally free solution. Go straight to IMAP, do not pass Go, do not futz around with POP3. For reasons why, I guess you could read this rambling blah blah blah weblog posting I did last night for some unknown reason on my website... http://www.natetech.com/index.php?p=172 Server-side sorting, spam filtering, virus scanning, yadda yadda yadda... and all mail safely backed up and available on the server from anywhere at anytime with any standard mail client. Having the mail pre-sorted before even opening up the mail client is a wonderful thing. I don't know how people live without it. (And waiting on the client to do sorting which really should be a server-side job, and having to keep the rulesets synced between multiple clients on multiple OS's in my case, isn't going to happen.) Plus something I didn't mention on the webpage... I also have SquirrelMail running on that server and set it up under Apache with SSL support and a self-signed certificate. Thus, my own secure webmail system available world-wide from any browser on any machine... have had it since around the time Hotmail started up. Great for anytime you find yourself at a computer and need to check e-mail. Seriously -- it's nice to have mail services all handled on your own box. Even if you go with POP3 you'll like having your own server if you deal with lots of mail. > Getting Apache running was surprisingly painless (only a little blood > and sweat and no tears)(fighting the router/firewall was the greatest > hurdle). If adding FTP access (and possibly email) is as easy I can > see the possibly of writing it up as an integrated procedure for others. Apache is great software. Super flexible but also always just outperforms just about anything out there. Apache/Tomcat and JSP's will do amazing things, as will Apache/PHP. If you haven't looked at it, you may want to see if Gallery will run under Windows/Apache/PHP if you're dealing with photos. Very nice software. http://gallery.menalto.com/ You'd need PHP installed to use it. Let's see -- what else... FTP insecurity... yeah, that could be a problem for you if you are uploading anything sensitive or think anyone might be watching the upload in real-time or logging packets anywhere between you and the server... usernames and passwords in FTP are cleartext and viewable easily on the wire. Someone mentioned SFTP, which is really just a sub-set of ssh and scp. You can run a stock sshd on Windows using Cygwin for free, and it'll do all that... not as pretty or easy to set up as commercial $tuff... but available. Speaking of security, if you use any software on the Apache server to handle the uploads of the pictures, or stuff like that, it'll be worth looking into what I mentioned above... SSL support for Apache. mod_ssl works. You can create a free self-signed certificate and if you access the site via you'll get warnings from your browser, but at least you'll know that session is encrypted if you're doing remote administration work on the pictures, etc. Ah... that's all I can think of right now... it's too big a topic, two bullet points doesn't cover it all! ;-) Nate

2005\02\18@142611 by Bradley Ferguson

On Thu, 17 Feb 2005 13:34:44 +1300, Russell McMahon <spam_OUTapptechSTOPspamparadise.net.nz> wrote: > > You may want to consider whether this is really cost-effective as > > you > > have to keep up with software updates for your system when you > > expose > > it to the outside world like this. I know that most Linux > > distributions require a bit of work up front to secure them and I > > just > > plain don't trust Windows. > > Nor I. But I keep all mine right up to date with auto update. Not > perfect, but as close as Microsoft can get at any moment. Yeah, I don't trust auto update, either, so... I can't wait until someone finds a vulnerability in auto update itself so that it automatically installs a virus. :-) > > Of course, if you do actually have a lot > > of pictures > > 50,000+ :-) Somehow that doesn't surprise me. And I suppose that's just this months, so far? > > maybe this will work out for you in the long run without > > having to pay for hosting + disk space. > > The FTP server requirement is so a limited number of others can share > the website capability remotely. > Volume and traffic would be low. These would only be applications > where being on my system would add value. You might want to look at http://www.wikipedia.org as a system to run. Set up is a breeze and then everyone or anyone can edit, which includes uploading images. You can set permissions and whatnot, of course. I am working (slowly in my spare time) on setting one of these up where I work for product and technology research and development information. I have mine running on Windows XP with mySQL, Apache, and PHP. If you poke around http://www.wikimedia.org, you'll find they have one wiki setup solely for public domain images. I think piclist.com should switch to something based off of the wikimedia engine instead of the, uh, wonderful homemade, uh, system that it is currently running. Bradley

2005\02\18@194018 by James Newtons Massmind

AFAIK wikimedia doesn't address ownership. The "homemade" system at piclist.com allows private content as well as preventing newbie's from fing up content that is owned by a page editor. This is the main reason why I built the system. The other reason is that the actual site is just raw, pure HTML that I can browse directly here with AOLpress (a browser that is actually a wysiwyg editor at the same time) and can be transferred to CD (after a script extracts the private parts) for transfer to others. Any suggestions on making the "homemade" parts seem more professional would be very appreciated. --- James. > {Original Message removed}

2005\02\19@050336 by Nate Duehr

Bradley Ferguson wrote: >I think piclist.com should switch to something based off of the >wikimedia engine instead of the, uh, wonderful homemade, uh, system >that it is currently running. > > Read up on wiki-spam before you recommend that. Any "popular" wiki that's open to the public is going to get some really obnoxious advertising "submissions". Automated and annoying. (My WordPress blog software gets these, and I had to install software to combat them -- it looks for specifc spam-like behaviour and keeps them from posting "comments" on my blog that are actually advertisements... uggh.) Sometimes "homemade" truly is better -- no automated tool for this junk knows how to interface with it. Nate

2005\02\19@085246 by Gerhard Fiedler

Peter L. Peres wrote: > You can force the ftp server to accept only passive ftp requests by > default. That can cause troubles for the users who can't use that. Why would you do that? If I understand it correctly, passive ftp hasn't been created to make ftp servers more secure or more firewall-friendly, it has been created to make ftp clients more firewall-friendly. So I don't see a reason to block traditional ftp requests on a server... BTW, I can second the Serv-U ftp server. Very easy and comfortable to use, no problems in many years online. Gerhard

2005\02\19@085858 by Gerhard Fiedler

Nate Duehr wrote: > What? Your OS of choice doesn't come with a good FTP server? And you > pay how much for it?? ;-) (GRIN) FWIW, XP Home doesn't, it's a consumer system not intended for running servers. XP Pro and 2000 do come with http, ftp and smtp servers. Instead of XP Home you could use 2000 Pro here -- maybe you have an old 2k Pro license... ? Gerhard

2005\02\19@131317 by Peter L. Peres

On Sat, 19 Feb 2005, Gerhard Fiedler wrote: > Peter L. Peres wrote: > >> You can force the ftp server to accept only passive ftp requests by >> default. That can cause troubles for the users who can't use that. > > Why would you do that? If I understand it correctly, passive ftp hasn't > been created to make ftp servers more secure or more firewall-friendly, it > has been created to make ftp clients more firewall-friendly. So I don't see > a reason to block traditional ftp requests on a server... When you run a reasonably restrictive NAT router and allow ftp access, then the router will usually run a stateless firewall. That, and the lack of a ftp proxy running on the router may preclude ftp access from the outside (the connection may succeed only hang on the first transfer attempt when the data connection is attempted to a non-ftp port on the server, port about which the firewall in router cannot know, so it will block the client's attempt to connect). By forcing the server to run in passive mode the data connection originates with the server behind the router and the firewall lets it through. Peter

2005\02\20@101140 by Gerhard Fiedler

Peter L. Peres wrote: >>> You can force the ftp server to accept only passive ftp requests by >>> default. That can cause troubles for the users who can't use that. >> >> Why would you do that? If I understand it correctly, passive ftp hasn't >> been created to make ftp servers more secure or more firewall-friendly, it >> has been created to make ftp clients more firewall-friendly. So I don't see >> a reason to block traditional ftp requests on a server... > > When you run a reasonably restrictive NAT router On the server side? > and allow ftp access, then the router will usually run a stateless > firewall. That, and the lack of a ftp proxy running on the router may > preclude ftp access from the outside (the connection may succeed only > hang on the first transfer attempt when the data connection is attempted > to a non-ftp port on the server, port about which the firewall in router > cannot know, so it will block the client's attempt to connect). If I understand you correctly, it seems you are wrong. With "normal" (that is, non-passive) ftp, the /server/ initiates the data connection to the client. The data connection in normal ftp is from server port 20 to a non-ftp port on the client. So there is no problem with firewalls at the server side in normal mode: the control connection is incoming to port 21, the data connection is outgoing from port 20 (server) to a non-ftp port (on the client). The firewall problem with such a connection is at the client, not at the server. > By forcing the server to run in passive mode the data connection > originates with the server behind the router and the firewall lets it > through. No. In passive mode, both the initial connection and the data connection originate at the client (it's the server that's "passive" in this mode, compared to the normal mode). Passive mode was invented to solve the problem with routers or firewalls at the /client/ side, not at the server. Thus, I still don't see a reason to force a server to accept only passive ftp. You can leave that up to the client -- if normal ftp works for the client, that's fine for the server, too. Gerhard

2005\02\20@163412 by Peter L. Peres

On Sun, 20 Feb 2005, Gerhard Fiedler wrote: > If I understand you correctly, it seems you are wrong. With "normal" (that > is, non-passive) ftp, the /server/ initiates the data connection to the > client. The data connection in normal ftp is from server port 20 to a > non-ftp port on the client. So there is no problem with firewalls at the > server side in normal mode: the control connection is incoming to port 21, > the data connection is outgoing from port 20 (server) to a non-ftp port (on > the client). The firewall problem with such a connection is at the client, > not at the server. You are right, by bad. Peter

2005\02\21@112701 by Bradley Ferguson

On Fri, 18 Feb 2005 16:40:14 -0800, James Newtons Massmind <RemoveMEjamesnewtonspammassmind.org> wrote: > AFAIK wikimedia doesn't address ownership. The "homemade" system at > piclist.com allows private content as well as preventing newbie's from fing > up content that is owned by a page editor. This is the main reason why I > built the system. AFAIK, you're right about ownership. As to private content, if you are referring to the collections of your personal information (e.g., solar heating), you could run a seperate wikimedia engine (which is really just php scripts) for that. As to newbies, it requires no hacking of the scripts to prevent anonymous edits and turn off account creation. If somebody makes a mistake, revert their edit. If somebody becomes abusive, remove their account. Theoretically, you could hack the Wikimedia scripts to add in additional features, but perhaps you don't have the time for that these days (as compared to when you did the initial work on your current system). > The other reason is that the actual site is just raw, pure HTML that I can > browse directly here with AOLpress (a browser that is actually a wysiwyg > editor at the same time) and can be transferred to CD (after a script > extracts the private parts) for transfer to others. The wikis are not raw HTML, so you wouldn't be able to edit them, but the internal Wikimedia editor, although not wysiwig, allows fairly easy content creation and editing. You wouldn't be able to easily burn the wiki to a CD directly, but you could just run a site ripper, which would allow the PHP scripts to convert the internal database data to HTML. You might have to run a find/replace on the result to remove references to "special" pages, which the wiki would normally dynamically create. Your private (personal?) information would reside under a different subdirectory and so would not be picked up by the ripper. > Any suggestions on making the "homemade" parts seem more professional would > be very appreciated. Don't get me wrong, I think you've done a great job. What I refer to is only little things like javascript, the use of font size=+2, and the cluttered appearance of many of the pages. The clutter may simply be the nature of the beast--where it is a collection of thoughts from a multitude of people instead of an organized article. I mention Wikipedia because, there, a collection of thoughts there can be reformed into an organized article, but perhaps that wouldn't even be the correct thing to do as you would lose ownership of the information fairly quickly unless editors were very careful to maintain footnotes. There seem to be so many committed members to the list; it would be interesting to see what kind of definitive PIC resource they could develop if given the encyclopedic nature of a wiki. I hope this doesn't explode on the mailing list, though, it was just a brief comment. Bradley

2005\02\21@162059 by James Newtons Massmind

I doubt many people care enough to comment. My comments below: --- James. {Quote hidden}> -----Original Message----- > From: TakeThisOuTpiclist-bouncesspamRemoveMEmit.edu > [KILLspampiclist-bouncesspamspam_OUTmit.edu] On Behalf Of Bradley Ferguson > Sent: 2005 Feb 21, Mon 08:27 > To: Microcontroller discussion list - Public. > Subject: Re: [OT] Recommendations sought for FTP & POP3 servers > Importance: Low > > On Fri, 18 Feb 2005 16:40:14 -0800, James Newtons Massmind > <jamesnewtonRemoveMEmassmind.org> wrote: > > AFAIK wikimedia doesn't address ownership. The "homemade" system at > > piclist.com allows private content as well as preventing > newbie's from > > fing up content that is owned by a page editor. This is the main > > reason why I built the system. > > AFAIK, you're right about ownership. As to private content, > if you are referring to the collections of your personal > information (e.g., solar heating), you could run a seperate > wikimedia engine (which is really just php scripts) for that. No, I meant that it is possible to post content to the site which is ONLY available to the member who posted it. E.g. there are a number of trade secrets in the site that are not publicly viewable. On a single page, for a single subject, there can be paragraphs that are removed before the page is displayed. It allows me (and I hope others) to document everything in one place while still keeping parts of that documentation out of the public eye. > As to newbies, it requires no hacking of the scripts to > prevent anonymous edits and turn off account creation. If > somebody makes a mistake, revert their edit. If somebody > becomes abusive, remove their account. I like the current systems ability to allow anonymous page _appends_ while allowing only page editors to modify and organize the content of the page. Sadly, the volunteer rate for page editors has been abysmal. David Cary has done a lot of work. E.g. http://www.piclist.com/techref/app/protel.htm Surducan Vasile edits a page or two. www.piclist.com/techref/piclist/pcbcontest.htm Sergio Masci keeps the assembly language page in order. www.piclist.com/techref/microchip/language/asms.htm I may have forgotten some, sorry if I missed you. > Theoretically, you could hack the Wikimedia scripts to add in > additional features, but perhaps you don't have the time for > that these days (as compared to when you did the initial work > on your current system). Having invested this much time, I'm loath to toss it. I'd rather spend the time cleaning up and improving. {Quote hidden}> > The other reason is that the actual site is just raw, pure > HTML that I > > can browse directly here with AOLpress (a browser that is > actually a > > wysiwyg editor at the same time) and can be transferred to > CD (after a > > script extracts the private parts) for transfer to others. > > The wikis are not raw HTML, so you wouldn't be able to edit > them, but the internal Wikimedia editor, although not > wysiwig, allows fairly easy content creation and editing. > You wouldn't be able to easily burn the wiki to a CD > directly, but you could just run a site ripper, which would > allow the PHP scripts to convert the internal database data > to HTML. You might have to run a find/replace on the result > to remove references to "special" pages, which the wiki would > normally dynamically create. Your private (personal?) > information would reside under a different subdirectory and > so would not be picked up by the ripper. With 3 Gigabytes of content, rippers are the bane of my existence. It takes a long time just for the script that removes private content, and that has direct access to the file system rather than employing the web server. > > Any suggestions on making the "homemade" parts seem more > professional > > would be very appreciated. > > Don't get me wrong, I think you've done a great job. Thank you. > What I > refer to is only little things like javascript, Most of the functions will work without javascript, the scripting is there to "enhance the experience" <GRIN> if you will. Is there a better way to do it? > the use of > font size=+2, Where did I do that? I try to use heading tags, not FONT tags. Or did you mean the use of H1 at the start of each page? Other suggestions? > and the cluttered appearance of many of the > pages. The clutter may simply be the nature of the > beast--where it is a collection of thoughts from a multitude > of people instead of an organized article. I mention > Wikipedia because, there, a collection of thoughts there can > be reformed into an organized article, but perhaps that > wouldn't even be the correct thing to do as you would lose > ownership of the information fairly quickly unless editors > were very careful to maintain footnotes. Some of the ownership information is important, but page editors can reformat that easily. E.g. "Jack shit says: [blockquote] what he says" can easily be changed to "what he says [sup][a title='Jack Shit']1[/a][/sup]" when they bring the separate quotes together. The real problem here is the lack of page editors. And my unwillingness to allow anonymous page editors. Do you think it would help if I allowed people to add comments anywhere in the page rather than just at the end? > There seem to be so many committed members to the list; it > would be interesting to see what kind of definitive PIC > resource they could develop if given the encyclopedic nature > of a wiki. Again, I fail to see what the current site does not provide that a wiki does provide. I think of the site as a wiki, but one with a different user interface to allow more protection. In fact, I think the user interface is much easier for new users or those who are not familiar with wikis. The little form at the end is so simple to use, compared with all the codes, etc.. For formatting wiki content. > I hope this doesn't explode on the mailing list, though, it > was just a brief comment. I'm grateful for the attention. I hope it provides some critical feedback that will allow me to get the sort of involvement that some of the existing wikis have commanded. > Bradley > -

2005\02\21@200238 by Bradley Ferguson

On Mon, 21 Feb 2005 13:20:53 -0800, James Newtons Massmind <EraseMEjamesnewtonSTOPspamRemoveMEmassmind.org> wrote: {Quote hidden}> > From: spam_OUTpiclist-bouncesRemoveMEEraseMEmit.edu > > [TakeThisOuTpiclist-bouncesRemoveME@spam@mit.edu] On Behalf Of Bradley Ferguson > > Sent: 2005 Feb 21, Mon 08:27 > > On Fri, 18 Feb 2005 16:40:14 -0800, James Newtons Massmind > > <EraseMEjamesnewtonRemoveMEmassmind.org> wrote: > > > AFAIK wikimedia doesn't address ownership. The "homemade" system at > > > piclist.com allows private content as well as preventing > > newbie's from > > > fing up content that is owned by a page editor. This is the main > > > reason why I built the system. > > > > AFAIK, you're right about ownership. As to private content, > > if you are referring to the collections of your personal > > information (e.g., solar heating), you could run a seperate > > wikimedia engine (which is really just php scripts) for that. > > No, I meant that it is possible to post content to the site which is ONLY > available to the member who posted it. E.g. there are a number of trade > secrets in the site that are not publicly viewable. On a single page, for a > single subject, there can be paragraphs that are removed before the page is > displayed. > > It allows me (and I hope others) to document everything in one place while > still keeping parts of that documentation out of the public eye. Frankly, I don't see the point of that. If you're going to have an open resource, have an open resource. With the people that I interact with, I see that if you give them the option of hiding information (from other engineers in the same company) they tend to overuse it. That being said, I can see that being very useful for your own work. There would also be the issue of trust with trade secrets that might be sold on CD accidentally because I didn't format it correctly or due to a heisenbug in the script that removes such information or due to someone installing a file sharing program on a computer with access to the 3gig of data files that shares them automatically. Generally, I tend towards more openness and if something can't be placed in the public domain, I would not put it on a web server outside my sphere of control and/or trust. {Quote hidden}> > As to newbies, it requires no hacking of the scripts to > > prevent anonymous edits and turn off account creation. If > > somebody makes a mistake, revert their edit. If somebody > > becomes abusive, remove their account. > > I like the current systems ability to allow anonymous page _appends_ while > allowing only page editors to modify and organize the content of the page. > Sadly, the volunteer rate for page editors has been abysmal. David Cary has > done a lot of work. E.g. > http://www.piclist.com/techref/app/protel.htm > Surducan Vasile edits a page or two. > www.piclist.com/techref/piclist/pcbcontest.htm > Sergio Masci keeps the assembly language page in order. > www.piclist.com/techref/microchip/language/asms.htm > I may have forgotten some, sorry if I missed you. As I understand it, a single editor to a page? He or she has the sole responsibility of fixing typos, maintaining accuracy in rewrites of the content--it seems like a lot of responsibility and a lot of work. An aggressive editor should be able to keep a nicely organized page with the realization that some information is going to be removed because it is not on-topic. But, most people don't want to step on other's toes and you end up with a somewhat well written page with a bunch of miscellaneous cruft that doesn't belong, but the editor doesn't want to remove. (I'm speaking in general here, not anything specific to piclist.com.) The aspect of the wiki I like, is that anyone (with access) can make small or big corrections. In the end, the contents ends up naturally filtered through many minds and produces a fairly good product. It is difficult to find a balance between openness and protection, though. > > Theoretically, you could hack the Wikimedia scripts to add in > > additional features, but perhaps you don't have the time for > > that these days (as compared to when you did the initial work > > on your current system). > > Having invested this much time, I'm loath to toss it. I'd rather spend the > time cleaning up and improving. I understand that completely and recognize that this discussion is mostly academic given that. In your position I would be very reluctant to scrap something that works well for me for a pipe dream. {Quote hidden}> > > The other reason is that the actual site is just raw, pure > > HTML that I > > > can browse directly here with AOLpress (a browser that is > > actually a > > > wysiwyg editor at the same time) and can be transferred to > > CD (after a > > > script extracts the private parts) for transfer to others. > > > > The wikis are not raw HTML, so you wouldn't be able to edit > > them, but the internal Wikimedia editor, although not > > wysiwig, allows fairly easy content creation and editing. > > You wouldn't be able to easily burn the wiki to a CD > > directly, but you could just run a site ripper, which would > > allow the PHP scripts to convert the internal database data > > to HTML. You might have to run a find/replace on the result > > to remove references to "special" pages, which the wiki would > > normally dynamically create. Your private (personal?) > > information would reside under a different subdirectory and > > so would not be picked up by the ripper. > > With 3 Gigabytes of content, rippers are the bane of my existence. It takes > a long time just for the script that removes private content, and that has > direct access to the file system rather than employing the web server. Yes, I imagine it would be an overnight or even over the weekend project to effectively "compile" the site for burning to CD if you used Wikimedia. It would also probably have a larger disk load given that it maintains page revisions automatically. Out of curiosity, how much of that 3gig is maintained content and how much is mailing list archive? {Quote hidden}> > > Any suggestions on making the "homemade" parts seem more > > professional > > > would be very appreciated. > > > > Don't get me wrong, I think you've done a great job. > > Thank you. > > > What I > > refer to is only little things like javascript, > > Most of the functions will work without javascript, the scripting is there > to "enhance the experience" <GRIN> if you will. Is there a better way to do > it? A button that counts down to zero is not very common in most user interfaces. It is more common to simply have a wait page with a nice simple animated GIF to occupy the user while the browser counts down a redirect. Though not everyone has javascript enabled and not everyone follows redirects. > > the use of > > font size=+2, > > Where did I do that? I try to use heading tags, not FONT tags. Or did you > mean the use of H1 at the start of each page? Other suggestions? On the main index page, you list 10 items, 6 of them use bold or font+2, 6 of them use the work PicList with two different capitalizations, 4 of them are FAQs. I'm never really sure if I want to go to the PIC FAQ, PICLIST Mailing List FAQ, PICLIST Mailing List Archive, or the PICList.com Source Code Library, each of which with varying levels of emphasis. Interestingly, I go to the PIC FAQ and then see that PICList is the /ultimate/ PIC resource, which then brings me back to the page I was just at. One more thing I notice is that the top of the PIC FAQ page is title MicroChip Technologies, which isn't even the capitalization that Microchip uses let alone standard capitalization. Minor issues I would agree, but, of course, I enjoy reading sites like http://www.theslot.com/sharp.html There are a lot of small issues like that, which I would fix as I came across them in a wiki, but wouldn't bother emailing anyone about. (Present email excluded.) :) I like a simply, clean, elegant interface (compare http://www.google.com to http://www.yahoo.com), but I'm also no good at creating much of anything attractive with HTML. I can write it and copy/paste/modify other content, but I'm not much good at creating a page from the ground up. Back to the dead horse, the wiki takes care of most of the appearance making content creation easier and automatic page creation and accidental linking make organization easier. As I said in a previous email, I'm currently trying to implement a wiki within the company I work for. These engineers don't know HTML. I don't want to be the sole editor. I want hyperlinking. It seems like a very nice solid foundation. Bradley

2005\02\22@014930 by James Newtons Massmind

<SNIP> > As I understand it, a single editor to a page? He or she has > the sole responsibility of fixing typos, maintaining accuracy > in rewrites of the content--it seems like a lot of > responsibility and a lot of work. > An aggressive editor should be able to keep a nicely > organized page with the realization that some information is > going to be removed because it is not on-topic. But, most > people don't want to step on other's toes and you end up with > a somewhat well written page with a bunch of miscellaneous > cruft that doesn't belong, but the editor doesn't want to > remove. (I'm speaking in general here, not anything specific > to piclist.com.) The aspect of the wiki I like, is that > anyone (with access) can make small or big corrections. In > the end, the contents ends up naturally filtered through many > minds and produces a fairly good product. It is difficult to > find a balance between openness and protection, though. I've tried to make it less intimidating by allowing people to "give up" or release the position of page editor. Technically, you can take a page, change it, and release it. There is a slight delay in each part of that, but not much. <SNIP> > Yes, I imagine it would be an overnight or even over the > weekend project to effectively "compile" the site for burning > to CD if you used Wikimedia. It would also probably have a > larger disk load given that it maintains page revisions > automatically. Out of curiosity, how much of that 3gig is > maintained content and how much is mailing list archive? > I actually don't know. I think its about 2 GB in the archive and another gig of additional content. {Quote hidden}> > Most of the functions will work without javascript, the > scripting is > > there to "enhance the experience" <GRIN> if you will. Is there a > > better way to do it? > > A button that counts down to zero is not very common in most > user interfaces. It is more common to simply have a wait > page with a nice simple animated GIF to occupy the user while > the browser counts down a redirect. Though not everyone has > javascript enabled and not everyone follows redirects. You must be referring to the search delay page? That is true, but the "try again" button is not scripted and can be pressed manually for none-script browsers. {Quote hidden}> > > the use of > > > font size=+2, > > > > Where did I do that? I try to use heading tags, not FONT > tags. Or did > > you mean the use of H1 at the start of each page? Other suggestions? > > On the main index page, you list 10 items, 6 of them use bold or > font+2, 6 of them use the work PicList with two different > capitalizations, 4 of them are FAQs. Oh, yeah. That page is a nightmare. I've tried a few times to organize it. Maybe the truth is that I'm not a good page editor <GRIN>. Please let me know if you have better ideas. {Quote hidden}> I'm never really sure if I want to go to the PIC FAQ, PICLIST > Mailing List FAQ, PICLIST Mailing List Archive, or the > PICList.com Source Code Library, each of which with varying > levels of emphasis. > Interestingly, I go to the PIC FAQ and then see that PICList > is the /ultimate/ PIC resource, which then brings me back to > the page I was just at. One more thing I notice is that the > top of the PIC FAQ page is title MicroChip Technologies, > which isn't even the capitalization that Microchip uses let > alone standard capitalization. Guilty, guilty. {Quote hidden}> Minor issues I would agree, but, of course, I enjoy reading > sites like http://www.theslot.com/sharp.html There are a lot > of small issues like that, which I would fix as I came across > them in a wiki, but wouldn't bother emailing anyone about. > (Present email excluded.) > :) > > I like a simply, clean, elegant interface (compare > http://www.google.com to http://www.yahoo.com), but I'm also no good at > creating much of anything attractive with HTML. I can write > it and copy/paste/modify other content, but I'm not much good > at creating a page from the ground up. > Back to the dead horse, the wiki takes care of most of the > appearance making content creation easier and automatic page > creation and accidental linking make organization easier. Hummm... Maybe HTML allows too much control? I could try for page templates... > As I said in a previous email, I'm currently trying to > implement a wiki within the company I work for. These > engineers don't know HTML. > I don't want to be the sole editor. I want hyperlinking. It > seems like a very nice solid foundation. > > Bradley > -

'[OT] Recommendations sought for FTP & POP3 servers'
2005\03\27@124240 by Morgan Olsson

Russell McMahon 23:22 2005-02-16 posted this request. As I have quite a backlog on PICLIST mail i respond now: I am using, and have by customer installed http://www.robtex.com/viking.features.html running on any MSWindows >=Windws95 (there is a patch to get more sockets on win95) Viking handles a lot protocils by itself, thus is efficient even when running on slower computer. Download it, put the file in a folder where you want it to live and start it, and it installs itself. All easily configured by web interface. Surf to it at http://127.0.0.1/viking and set it up. 90day trial. Even if the author was not my brother, i would still recommend it ;) There is a discussion list where also the autor responds. /Morgan -- Morgan Olsson, Kivik, Sweden

'[EE][TECH] FTP server for Windows'
2005\08\12@062005 by Russell McMahon

Anyone like to recommend a (preferably free) FTP server for Windows. There are many out there. I'm more interested in ease of ownership than features. If I can have both so much the better. Being able to read and write files remotely is about the extent of my spec. Anything else is icing. WAR FTP sounds OK http://www.warftp.org/ One slight detraction is the site's repeated attempts to download double-click tracking material not only when you access the page (as many sites do) but at ongoing intervals. Spybot deals with that, but it's annoying. Any favourites, and why? For HTTP I'm using Apache under WinXP-home at present and it's excellent. ie it "just goes" as expected. While I'm here, thoughts on a suitable (again preferably free) Windows based POP3 server? Again, ease of ownership is the primary factor. This would probably be get used behind a web based email system which forwarded to POP3 to give me some security against local outages. Russell McMahon

2005\08\12@081029 by Gerhard Fiedler

Russell McMahon wrote: > Anyone like to recommend a (preferably free) FTP server for Windows. > There are many out there. I'm more interested in ease of ownership > than features. If I can have both so much the better. If you have any Pro (2k or XP) version, try IIS... pretty easy, already there, and if you're worried about security, FTP is not for you anyway. (I don't want to get into a web/ftp server war here... but IIS is being used successfully in large and safety-critical operations.) > While I'm here, thoughts on a suitable (again preferably free) Windows > based POP3 server? Again, ease of ownership is the primary factor. You could try one of the Hamsters. Hamster is a news and email (pop3 and smtp) server. It comes in two flavors: "Classic" http://www.tglsoft.de/misc/hamster_en.htm and "Playground" http://www.elbiah.de/hamster/index.htm. The differences between the versions (both seem to be active) are subtle... I use the Playground version as a local news server. Gerhard

2005\08\12@081859 by Carey Fisher - NCS

> Anyone like to recommend a (preferably free) FTP server for Windows. > There are many out there. I'm more interested in ease of ownership > than features. If I can have both so much the better. > Being able to read and write files remotely is about the extent of my > spec. Anything else is icing. > > WAR FTP sounds OK > > http://www.warftp.org/ > > One slight detraction is the site's repeated attempts to download > double-click tracking material not only when you access the page (as > many sites do) but at ongoing intervals. Spybot deals with that, but > it's annoying. > > Any favourites, and why? I really like WS_FTP from Ipswitch. ( http://www.ipswitch.com ). I use the free version to upload files to our website and it's super easy to use and flawless. No spyware or any other malware. Carey

2005\08\12@083038 by M. Adam Davis

I've used http://www.xitami.com for both FTP and HTTP. You can disable the HTTP (or put it on a different blocked port) and simply use the FTP server. -Adam On 8/12/05, Russell McMahon <spamapptech.....spamparadise.net.nz> wrote: {Quote hidden}> Anyone like to recommend a (preferably free) FTP server for Windows. > There are many out there. I'm more interested in ease of ownership > than features. If I can have both so much the better. > Being able to read and write files remotely is about the extent of my > spec. Anything else is icing. > > WAR FTP sounds OK > > http://www.warftp.org/ > > One slight detraction is the site's repeated attempts to download > double-click tracking material not only when you access the page (as > many sites do) but at ongoing intervals. Spybot deals with that, but > it's annoying. > > Any favourites, and why? > For HTTP I'm using Apache under WinXP-home at present and it's > excellent. ie it "just goes" as expected. > > While I'm here, thoughts on a suitable (again preferably free) Windows > based POP3 server? Again, ease of ownership is the primary factor. > This would probably be get used behind a web based email system which > forwarded to POP3 to give me some security against local outages. > > > > Russell McMahon > > -

2005\08\12@093411 by Tim N9PUZ

Russell McMahon wrote: > Anyone like to recommend a (preferably free) FTP server for Windows. > There are many out there. I'm more interested in ease of ownership > than features. If I can have both so much the better. > Being able to read and write files remotely is about the extent of my > spec. Anything else is icing. > > WAR FTP sounds OK > > http://www.warftp.org/ > > One slight detraction is the site's repeated attempts to download > double-click tracking material not only when you access the page (as > many sites do) but at ongoing intervals. Spybot deals with that, but > it's annoying. I used this one for about a year and it's fairly easy to setup and seems to work well. In my case it was for a private site that was only used by our family so I don't think there was ever more than one or two connections at a time. Ultimately the service was replaced on my PC by an older PC retasked as a server running Linux with web, ftp, file server functions, etc. Tim

2005\08\12@094818 by John Nall

> Anyone like to recommend a (preferably free) FTP server for Windows. Being able to read and write files remotely is about > the extent of my spec. Anything else is icing. I have very successfully used PSFTP which is part of a package of several programs available at http://www.chiark.greenend.org.uk/~sgtatham/putty/download.html. The package is free, and a breeze to use (provided that you don't mind using the command-line feature of Windows). SFTP is highly recommended over FTP for transferring files, because of the security issue. John

2005\08\12@131421 by Christopher Head

-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE----- Hash: SHA1 Hi, I agree with the few people who have suggested an SFTP instead of FTP system. However, if you must use FTP, I've used GuildFTPD before without seeming to run into any problems. It's free and has a graphical configuration and monitoring system, and I think it runs even on older Windowses (eg 98). Chris -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- Version: GnuPG v1.2.1 (MingW32) iD8DBQFC/Njr6ZGQ8LKA8nwRAmr6AJ90/wbPgfxiGDQZwWvhQt7QIPGz6QCeIL7D Wxo5+b/9JnkKwumHZEDvEis= =yj8e -----END PGP SIGNATURE-----

2005\08\12@140133 by James Newtons Massmind

I very much do NOT recommend war ftp. Why? - the code is closed source and written by ONE person not a company. - Because the author is a self reported cracker, dissonant, and political hotspot. Other than that, it works just great, as far as I could tell when my company made me use it anyway. --- James. > {Original Message removed}

'OFFLIST: FTP server for Windows'
2005\08\12@140947 by James Newtons Massmind

OFFLIST! I use a mail server called PostOffice (or Post.Office) which is no longer available (the company that owned the rights to it pulled it and replaced it with a totally different program that does not have the same features.) I have a copy of the program if you want it. I'm not saying this on list because I am a bit concerned about it possibly having vulerabilities (although I've not been able to find any) and I don't want to tip anyone off. It has some nice features, and a good web based interface. One really nice thing is that it supports automatic email to file delivery so that things like the piclist archive can work. Also, just about all management functions can be performed from the command line (as well as the web) so that tasks can be automated in batch files if needed. One of these days, I'm going to start providing "@piclist.com" email addresses to list members if they want them. Frankly, for your needs, there are most likely better alternatives in the open source community. --- James. > {Original Message removed}

'[EE][TECH] FTP server for Windows'
2005\08\13@001009 by Andrew Warren

Russell McMahon <piclistspam_OUT@spam@MIT.EDU> wrote: > Anyone like to recommend a (preferably free) FTP server for Windows. I like Filezilla Server. You can download it (and/or the Filezilla FTP client) from: http://sourceforge.net/projects/filezilla/ > While I'm here, thoughts on a suitable (again preferably free) Windows > based POP3 server? Mercury Mail, by David Harris (author of the excellent Pegasus Mail client that I've been using for the last twelve years): http://www.pmail.com -Andy === Andrew Warren - .....fastfwdspam.....ix.netcom.com

2005\08\15@010311 by liam .

> > Anyone like to recommend a (preferably free) FTP server for Windows. > > Depending upon which version you choose I would recomend most of the software avaliable from Pablo Software Solutions (I havent used it all). http://www.pablosoftwaresolutions.com/html/downloads.html I have no offiliation with this software but have used some of it many times due to its size and simplicity (and lack of installation required on secured systems).

2005\08\15@080009 by Eduardo Garcia

Hi Russel! When you say about ftp server the first thing that come in my mind is FileZilla! This FREE software can be found in sourceforge web site. I have tried a lot of softwares and this is the best in my view! Good Luck! {Original Message removed}

2005\08\15@092511 by Gerhard Fiedler

Russell McMahon wrote: > Anyone like to recommend a (preferably free) FTP server for Windows. I guess you are aware that ftp is a pain for firewall configuration -- either on the server side (passive ftp) or on the client side (active ftp). Most ftp connections these days are probably passive, because of the easier client configuration, and because in many connection configurations active ftp just doesn't work. But it puts the burden of adequate handling of the (almost) arbitrary connection ports for data connections on the server side. The easiest way around this is IMO a router that has a built-in VPN server. Allows you to connect from a remote location to your local LAN, and most firewall/safety issues are out of the way. You still can use an ftp server then to transfer the files, but you don't have to worry so much about firewall configuration, as the ftp traffic is protected by the VPN connection. Gerhard

2005\08\15@094047 by John Remington

On 8/15/05, liam . <liaaam2KILLspamEraseMEgmail.com> wrote: > > > Anyone like to recommend a (preferably free) FTP server for Windows. > > > > > > Depending upon which version you choose I would recomend most of the > software avaliable from Pablo Software Solutions (I havent used it > all). > > www.pablosoftwaresolutions.com/html/downloads.html > > I have no offiliation with this software but have used some of it many > times due to its size and simplicity (and lack of installation > required on secured systems). > I second Pablo's FTP, works good. I' use filezilla and ws_ftp for client applications, and Pablo's FTP for the server applicaion. Works good, easy to install and use, I'm running it on a win95 box along with apache, php, and mysql..

2005\08\15@202504 by Nino Benci

part 1 612 bytes content-type:text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1; format=flowed (decoded 7bit) I use FileZilla. Goto SourceForge.net. liam . wrote: {Quote hidden}>>>Anyone like to recommend a (preferably free) FTP server for Windows. >> >> > > Depending upon which version you choose I would recomend most of the > software avaliable from Pablo Software Solutions (I havent used it > all). > > www.pablosoftwaresolutions.com/html/downloads.html > > I have no offiliation with this software but have used some of it many > times due to its size and simplicity (and lack of installation > required on secured systems). > part 2 373 bytes content-type:text/x-vcard; charset=utf-8; name=Nino.Benci.vcf (decoded 7bit) begin:vcard fn:Antonio L. Benci n:Benci;Antonio L. org:Monash University;School of Physics adr:;;;Monash University;VIC;3800;Australia email;internet:EraseMEelectronic.services@spam@@spam@spme.monash.edu.au title:Professional Officer tel;work:+613 9905 3649 tel;fax:+613 9905 3637 x-mozilla-html:FALSE url:http://spme.monash.edu.au version:2.1 end:vcard part 3 35 bytes content-type:text/plain; charset="us-ascii" (decoded 7bit)

'[PIC] FTP-client'
2006\01\18@131737 by Tomas Larsson

I am looking for a freware FTP-client that I can use to debug an embedded FTP-Server. I find ftp-clients such as WS_DTP and the command-line client in XP not useful. What I need is a tool tha shows me all comm between the client and the server including low-level comm. Sofar they just throw an "unknown error", and I cant find out why. When I am looking on a the packet received from the server, it looks ok, but there is no response from the client, after the first server ACK. Anyone that has any ideas. With best regards Tomas Larsson Sweden http://www.naks.mine.nu for downloads etc. ftp://ktl.mine.nu for uploads. Or use the free http://www.yousendit.com service. Verus Amicus Est Tamquam Alter Idem

2006\01\18@132448 by Alex Harford

On 1/18/06, Tomas Larsson <@spam@tomasspamKILLspamtlec.se> wrote: > I am looking for a freware FTP-client that I can use to debug an embedded > FTP-Server. I really like ncftp: http://www.ncftp.com/ncftp/ Alex

2006\01\18@133026 by Charles Craft

Are you watching both the command (21) and data (20) ports for ftp traffic? Most network gear supports tftp for data transfer. Is that an option on your embedded FTP-server? {Original Message removed}

2006\01\18@133411 by Danny Sauer

Tomas wrote regarding '[PIC] FTP-client' on Wed, Jan 18 at 12:20: > When I am looking on a the packet received from the server, it looks ok, but > there is no response from the client, after the first server ACK. While I really like filezilla for an FTP client, what you want is an arbitrary FTP client in combination with a packet sniffer. Get ethereal. http://www.ethereal.com/ You'll need pcap as well, but that's docuemnted on the ethereal site somewhere. No sane FTP client will do what you really want to do here, wheras Ethereal will both show you the individual bits on the network and an assembled FTP stream. And it'll help diagnose most any other network trouble, too. Oh yeah, it's free, too. Darned hippie free software punks. ;) --Danny

2006\01\18@133750 by Jon Philpott

Tomas Larsson wrote: >What I need is a tool tha shows me all comm between the client and the >server including low-level comm. > > Try using those tools and using ethereal to sniff the traffic. Ethereal has very good protocol analysis for most common protocols. Jon.

2006\01\18@134454 by John Pfaff

FileZilla is open source. If you want, you can modify it to give you what you want. http://filezilla.sourceforge.net/ Tomas Larsson wrote: {Quote hidden}>I am looking for a freware FTP-client that I can use to debug an embedded >FTP-Server. > >I find ftp-clients such as WS_DTP and the command-line client in XP not >useful. >What I need is a tool tha shows me all comm between the client and the >server including low-level comm. > >Sofar they just throw an "unknown error", and I cant find out why. > >When I am looking on a the packet received from the server, it looks ok, but >there is no response from the client, after the first server ACK. > >Anyone that has any ideas. > >With best regards > >Tomas Larsson >Sweden >http://www.naks.mine.nu for downloads etc. >ftp://ktl.mine.nu for uploads. Or use the free http://www.yousendit.com service. > >Verus Amicus Est Tamquam Alter Idem > > > > >

2006\01\18@135623 by Wouter van Ooijen

> Sofar they just throw an "unknown error", and I cant find out why. > > When I am looking on a the packet received from the server, > it looks ok, but > there is no response from the client, after the first server ACK. > > Anyone that has any ideas. If you use ethernet, get a packet sniffer. Ethereal? Wouter van Ooijen -- ------------------------------------------- Van Ooijen Technische Informatica: http://www.voti.nl consultancy, development, PICmicro products docent Hogeschool van Utrecht: http://www.voti.nl/hvu

2006\01\18@135836 by Mike Hord

Can't say enough good things about filezilla. Also provides a superb freeware server. Easy as cake to set up and use. Mike H. > I am looking for a freware FTP-client that I can use to debug an embedded > FTP-Server.

2006\01\18@141119 by James Newtons Massmind

Turn debug on. At the xp command prompt: Ftp ftp> help Commands may be abbreviated. Commands are: ! delete literal prompt send ? debug ls put status append dir mdelete pwd trace ascii disconnect mdir quit type bell get mget quote user binary glob mkdir recv verbose bye hash mls remotehelp cd help mput rename close lcd open rmdir ftp> help debug debug Toggle debugging mode ftp> debug Debugging On . ftp> open ftp.massmind.org Connected to nt2.massmind.org. 220 nt2 Microsoft FTP Service (Version 4.0). User (nt2.massmind.org:(none)): anonymous ---> USER anonymous 331 Anonymous access allowed, send identity (e-mail name) as password. Password: ---> PASS spamBeGonejamesnewtonRemoveMEEraseMEmassmind.org 230-Welcome! 230- 230-Upload your files to \in and email RemoveMEwebmasterKILLspamRemoveMEmassmind.org requesting approval 230- 230-Your file will be moved to 230-\member\(yourID)\(file) 230- 230 Anonymous user logged in. ftp> ls ---> PORT 192,168,0,17,12,117 200 PORT command successful. ---> NLST 150 Opening ASCII mode data connection for file list. in pub 226 Transfer complete. ftp: 9 bytes received in 0.03Seconds 0.28Kbytes/sec. ftp> cd in ---> CWD in 250 CWD command successful. Notice the lines starting with ---> which are the low level commands. --- James. > {Original Message removed}

2006\01\18@144429 by Tomas Larsson

I've been using a packet sniffer called "Analyzer", I haven't been able to get ethereal to work on my box. If I look at the packets sent by WINXP command client, I can se a port request to port 21. The server answers that request with correct MAC and IP, SEQ=0 and ACK is the SEQ from the client +1, but the client repeats its request, don't seem to get the answer from the server. The client exits with "unknown error" after a while. With best regards Tomas Larsson Sweden Verus Amicus Est Tamquam Alter Idem > {Original Message removed}

2006\01\18@150830 by Tomas Larsson

Downloaded te latest Ethereal, and big surprise, it works, that is ethereal, also found the problem, checksum is wrong according to ethereal. With best regards Tomas Larsson Sweden Verus Amicus Est Tamquam Alter Idem > {Original Message removed}

2006\01\18@153323 by Wouter van Ooijen

> Downloaded te latest Ethereal, and big surprise, it works, > that is ethereal, > also found the problem, checksum is wrong according to ethereal. Better do the checksum yourself and verify, checksum is one of the things I sometimes suspect Ethereal is wrong. But of course the best bet is that it is right. Wouter van Ooijen -- ------------------------------------------- Van Ooijen Technische Informatica: http://www.voti.nl consultancy, development, PICmicro products docent Hogeschool van Utrecht: http://www.voti.nl/hvu

2006\01\18@160228 by Tomas Larsson

I have to do a manual check of the checksum, I do however think that the code is correct as such, since it calculates the received checksum and it equals with the checksum received. Anyway need to dig into that code. With best regards Tomas Larsson Sweden Verus Amicus Est Tamquam Alter Idem > {Original Message removed}

2006\01\18@161732 by Russell McMahon

> Turn debug on. At the xp command prompt: > > Ftp > ftp> help Also helps to have edlin available :-) (which it still is on my XP !) And, do note the all important 'bye' command. None of the more expected alternatives work (except Ctrl-Alt-Del). RM

2006\01\18@165933 by Tomas Larsson

Tried that, won't help, debug only shows what is happehning when the connection is established, didn't get that far though. With best regards Tomas Larsson Sweden Verus Amicus Est Tamquam Alter Idem > {Original Message removed}

2006\01\19@155136 by Peter

On Thu, 19 Jan 2006, Russell McMahon wrote: {Quote hidden}>> Turn debug on. At the xp command prompt: >> >> Ftp >> ftp> help > > > Also helps to have edlin available :-) > (which it still is on my XP !) > > And, do note the all important 'bye' command. None of the more expected > alternatives work (except Ctrl-Alt-Del). echo bye >exit.bat Peter

'[OT]:: Implementing an FTP server on Windows XP bo'
2007\11\02@095522 by Russell McMahon

Summary: Want to implement FTP server with minimum bloodshed and effort. I run an Apache web server on a Windows XP home PC. Until now I've not provided remote FTP access. I'd now like to do so. I know that there are any number of suitable software packages "out there" including many good free ones, and all the information needed to implement them. I also know that what is often trivially easy after you've done it a few times can be arcanely hard and ultra time consuming first time round. I also know that the fantastic straight forward instructions that one finds on a website somewhere turn out to be less useful than one hopes at the time. (Even if all they are doing is eg telling you how to turn FTP on on an existing Windows XP Pro box). SO Can anyone suggest the quickest easiest bullet proof way of getting FTP going. Free would be good unless there's a 'cheap' way that stands head and shoulders above all the 'free' options. I could run it instead on a Windows XP Professional PC separate from the Apache server if that helped. (eg from memory I think u$oft took FTP serving off XP home but left it on Pro). The object is to allow me to have FTP access from China if required. Suitable security would be 'nice'. Ability to upload files would also be nice but download (to China) would suffice at this stage. Russell

2007\11\02@102204 by Rolf

Hi Russell, The biggest issue with FTP is not the server, but the firewall. You need stateful packet firewall systems in order to protect the rest of your system, while opening the *two* ftp ports. Although my FTP experience is Linux based, the firewalling issues are a problem regardless of the FTP implementation. Here's a somewhat reasonable description of the problems: http://www.isaserver.org/articles/How_the_FTP_protocol_Challenges_Firewall_Security.html It is most likely that you are behind a NAT system (a home router, or something else), and this exacerbates the problems. Basically, securing an FTP server requires a very good understanding of your Firewall. The actual FTP server is a cinch in comparison. Rolf Russell McMahon wrote: {Quote hidden}> Summary: Want to implement FTP server with minimum > bloodshed and effort. > > I run an Apache web server on a Windows XP home PC. > Until now I've not provided remote FTP access. I'd now like > to do so. I know that there are any number of suitable > software packages "out there" including many good free ones, > and all the information needed to implement them. I also > know that what is often trivially easy after you've done it > a few times can be arcanely hard and ultra time consuming > first time round. I also know that the fantastic straight > forward instructions that one finds on a website somewhere > turn out to be less useful than one hopes at the time. (Even > if all they are doing is eg telling you how to turn FTP on > on an existing Windows XP Pro box). > > SO > > Can anyone suggest the quickest easiest bullet proof way of > getting FTP going. Free would be good unless there's a > 'cheap' way that stands head and shoulders above all the > 'free' options. > > I could run it instead on a Windows XP Professional PC > separate from the Apache server if that helped. (eg from > memory I think u$oft took FTP serving off XP home but left > it on Pro). > > The object is to allow me to have FTP access from China if > required. Suitable security would be 'nice'. Ability to > upload files would also be nice but download (to China) > would suffice at this stage. > > > > Russell > >

2007\11\02@102957 by Rolf

Hi Russell, I meant to add to my previous mail.... Why don't you instead get familiar with SSH (using 'Putty'). Doing some quick research indicates.... SSH *is* available for windows, and you probably want to implement an SFTP server. Here are some starting points: http://www.digitalmediaminute.com/article/1487/setting-up-a-sftp-server-on-windows http://www.google.ca/url?sa=t&ct=res&cd=1&url=http%3A%2F%2Fhttp://www.chiark.greenend.org.uk%2F~sgtatham%2Fputty%2F&ei=UzQrR6a2CpyMgwKwifH3CQ&usg=AFQjCNEtEh-zdWFiiosvMznjktZ3Wxpq-A&sig2=aLVoBT_vcAlItaPq2aEQeg Russell McMahon wrote: {Quote hidden}> Summary: Want to implement FTP server with minimum > bloodshed and effort. > > I run an Apache web server on a Windows XP home PC. > Until now I've not provided remote FTP access. I'd now like > to do so. I know that there are any number of suitable > software packages "out there" including many good free ones, > and all the information needed to implement them. I also > know that what is often trivially easy after you've done it > a few times can be arcanely hard and ultra time consuming > first time round. I also know that the fantastic straight > forward instructions that one finds on a website somewhere > turn out to be less useful than one hopes at the time. (Even > if all they are doing is eg telling you how to turn FTP on > on an existing Windows XP Pro box). > > SO > > Can anyone suggest the quickest easiest bullet proof way of > getting FTP going. Free would be good unless there's a > 'cheap' way that stands head and shoulders above all the > 'free' options. > > I could run it instead on a Windows XP Professional PC > separate from the Apache server if that helped. (eg from > memory I think u$oft took FTP serving off XP home but left > it on Pro). > > The object is to allow me to have FTP access from China if > required. Suitable security would be 'nice'. Ability to > upload files would also be nice but download (to China) > would suffice at this stage. > > > > Russell > >

2007\11\02@103313 by Rolf

Not having a good day ... ;-( Pressed Send too soon: http://www.google.ca/search?num=100&hl=en&safe=off&q=SSH+Windows+SFTP&btnG=Search&meta= http://www.chiark.greenend.org.uk/~sgtatham/putty/ http://sshwindows.sourceforge.net/ Rolf

2007\11\02@114309 by Herbert Graf

On Fri, 2007-11-02 at 09:21 -0500, Rolf wrote: > Hi Russell, > > The biggest issue with FTP is not the server, but the firewall. You need > stateful packet firewall systems in order to protect the rest of your > system, while opening the *two* ftp ports. > > Although my FTP experience is Linux based, the firewalling issues are a > problem regardless of the FTP implementation. Agreed. Personally I don't use ftp anymore. Russel: Use ssh. It only requires one port to be open, and all traffic is encrypted. No fancy firewall rules, just forward port 22 (or even better change to another port) to the machine. I enabled ssh on my linux box and now I can use sftp which has all the functionality of ftp, but over the ssh link, so it's secure. I don't know of an ssh server for windows, but I'm sure google will help there. TTYL

2007\11\02@124305 by Brendan Gillatt

-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE----- Hash: SHA1 Russell McMahon wrote: {Quote hidden}> Summary: Want to implement FTP server with minimum > bloodshed and effort. > > I run an Apache web server on a Windows XP home PC. > Until now I've not provided remote FTP access. I'd now like > to do so. I know that there are any number of suitable > software packages "out there" including many good free ones, > and all the information needed to implement them. I also > know that what is often trivially easy after you've done it > a few times can be arcanely hard and ultra time consuming > first time round. I also know that the fantastic straight > forward instructions that one finds on a website somewhere > turn out to be less useful than one hopes at the time. (Even > if all they are doing is eg telling you how to turn FTP on > on an existing Windows XP Pro box). > > SO > > Can anyone suggest the quickest easiest bullet proof way of > getting FTP going. Free would be good unless there's a > 'cheap' way that stands head and shoulders above all the > 'free' options. > > I could run it instead on a Windows XP Professional PC > separate from the Apache server if that helped. (eg from > memory I think u$oft took FTP serving off XP home but left > it on Pro). > > The object is to allow me to have FTP access from China if > required. Suitable security would be 'nice'. Ability to > upload files would also be nice but download (to China) > would suffice at this stage. Filezilla has been working flawlessly with me for the last few years. Imaginably, the translation between windows and linux permissions is a bit clunky, though it can be done. - -- Brendan Gillatt brendan {at} brendangillatt {dot} co {dot} uk http://www.brendangillatt.co.uk PGP Key: pgp.mit.edu:11371/pks/lookup?op=get&search=0xBACD7433 -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- Version: GnuPG v1.4.3 (MingW32) iD8DBQFHK1OmkA9dCbrNdDMRAnIkAKDkN9K5LNUs+YO/MVV8ptoYu2R2yACgmYAW fJVmGrj8A/yO944BsUAjUls= =Gqi9 -----END PGP SIGNATURE-----

2007\11\02@143610 by Nate Duehr

Russell McMahon wrote: > Summary: Want to implement FTP server with minimum > bloodshed and effort. aptitude install vsftpd [Watch while aptitude pulls in all the necessary dependencies and the vsftpd package...] Edit /etc/vsftpd.conf to turn it on. Done. {Quote hidden}> I run an Apache web server on a Windows XP home PC. > Until now I've not provided remote FTP access. I'd now like > to do so. I know that there are any number of suitable > software packages "out there" including many good free ones, > and all the information needed to implement them. I also > know that what is often trivially easy after you've done it > a few times can be arcanely hard and ultra time consuming > first time round. I also know that the fantastic straight > forward instructions that one finds on a website somewhere > turn out to be less useful than one hopes at the time. (Even > if all they are doing is eg telling you how to turn FTP on > on an existing Windows XP Pro box). Oops. You're on Windows, not Debian. Nevermind. :-) Heh... sorry Russell, I had to point it out... You'd have been done in 5 minutes if you weren't running XP for your server OS. Switch to an OS designed to be used on servers, man! Dump the GUI. Hack. :-) ;-) Nate

2007\11\02@191301 by Jake Anderson

Rolf wrote: > Hi Russell, I meant to add to my previous mail.... > > Why don't you instead get familiar with SSH (using 'Putty'). Doing some > quick research indicates.... > > SSH *is* available for windows, and you probably want to implement an > SFTP server. > > Here are some starting points: > > http://www.digitalmediaminute.com/article/1487/setting-up-a-sftp-server-on-windows > > http://www.google.ca/url?sa=t&ct=res&cd=1&url=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.chiark.greenend.org.uk%2F~sgtatham%2Fputty%2F&ei=UzQrR6a2CpyMgwKwifH3CQ&usg=AFQjCNEtEh-zdWFiiosvMznjktZ3Wxpq-A&sig2=aLVoBT_vcAlItaPq2aEQeg > I'm with rolf on this one setup SSH, it gives you lots of flexibility in addition to generic file transfer. It will also let you tunnel connections through it and the like which might be handy.

2007\11\02@201851 by Marcel Duchamp

Jake Anderson wrote: > I'm with rolf on this one > setup SSH, it gives you lots of flexibility in addition to generic file > transfer. It will also let you tunnel connections through it and the > like which might be handy. Innocent bystander question... suppose Russell goes to China and needs to get some files from his box back home. He (for the sake of my question) has lost his laptop, didn't bring it, etc. and the only accessible computer is a cyber-cafe with possible keystroke logger, etc. Does the SSH technique prevent others from capturing passwords and such? How does the idea work to keep outsiders out of his box back home? Enquiring minds want to know... Me: total newby minus one.

2007\11\02@204212 by Jake Anderson

Marcel Duchamp wrote: {Quote hidden}> Jake Anderson wrote: > > >> I'm with rolf on this one >> setup SSH, it gives you lots of flexibility in addition to generic file >> transfer. It will also let you tunnel connections through it and the >> like which might be handy. >> > > Innocent bystander question... suppose Russell goes to China and needs > to get some files from his box back home. He (for the sake of my > question) has lost his laptop, didn't bring it, etc. and the only > accessible computer is a cyber-cafe with possible keystroke logger, etc. > > Does the SSH technique prevent others from capturing passwords and such? > How does the idea work to keep outsiders out of his box back home? > > Enquiring minds want to know... > > Me: total newby minus one. > If he uses password authentication then your hosed. If you use certificate auth then its ok, of course the certificate is more than likley on the laptop. The only way around it is some kind of jumping screen keyboard that you enter your password on with a mouse. Of course if they record the screen your still hosed. Pretty much the same with all encryption techniques. They only prevent somebody between the two end points gaining access. If an end point is compromised then all bets are off. I spose the only way around it would be a challenge response type password question. you memorise some formula (or use a physical doohickey), the remote end gives you the challenge in the form of a number (or two). You perform some maths on that number and you reply with the answer. Same way passwords are authenticated now without sending the password over the network, you just take the hashing functions from the computer and perform them in your head or on some "trusted" device.

2007\11\02@210641 by Russell McMahon

>> Innocent bystander question... suppose Russell goes to >> China and needs >> to get some files from his box back home. He (for the >> sake of my >> question) has lost his laptop, didn't bring it, etc. and >> the only >> accessible computer is a cyber-cafe with possible >> keystroke logger, etc. When using cyber cafe PCs for related things - which I do as infrequently as reasonably possible - I try to reboot the PC after use. Many now prevent this. Of course, as long as I didn't also lose the USB flash key in my pocket at the same time they don't have the core access software, whatever it is :-). I thought that VNC or similar may serve my need well enough. I've long thought of a very simple method for the DOS box nerd but never implemented it. Access is to an almost empty drive. Inquirer crafts text scripts and stores them on drive and the unseen watcher copies these, deletes them and implements them on target system and presents the result. One's own low low level scripting system. Very compromisable by a savvy watcher / recorder but near utterly uncrackable to most people. Metaphor: Imagine trying to do something with eg EDLIN [:-) !!!] with no prior instruction and no access whatsoever to a manual or help file. Or even with uSoft's very functional but painful years old DOS FTP. Now write your own basic obscure instruction language and ... . eg DIR c"|DOCS|SNREP+.+ Would take only a 1:1 preprocessor to turn into ye olde arcanery but would foil 99.9+% Russell

2007\11\02@211847 by Russell McMahon

>> Russell McMahon wrote: >> Summary: Want to implement FTP server with minimum >> bloodshed and effort. > aptitude install vsftpd I just *knew* that someone was gonna come and preach de old time religion to me before we were through here. One of these days, I keep telling myself. And, have been doing so for years. But Windows works well enough most of the time that the effort required to uproot a lifetime of habit and experience is hard to come by. (AFAIR I first saw Windows running in 1984. I had a copy of the essentially unheard of Excel 1 with integral Windows runtime. That certainly didn';t last long. One of these days ... Russell

2007\11\02@212534 by M. Adam Davis

Russell, I've used Xitami with good success on windows before. It's a combined FTP and HTTP server, although the HTTP is enabled by default and the FTP is disabled by default. The configuration is done through the web interface, so if you don't want to use the HTTP for webpages, set it to another port so you can at least configure it without going through the files by hand. Pretty straightforward and simple, and free. As everyone else mentioned FTP is an insecure by default mode of file transfer. You should give serious thought to a VPN or SSH. -Adam On 11/2/07, Russell McMahon <TakeThisOuTapptechparadise.net.nz> wrote: {Quote hidden}> Summary: Want to implement FTP server with minimum > bloodshed and effort. > > I run an Apache web server on a Windows XP home PC. > Until now I've not provided remote FTP access. I'd now like > to do so. I know that there are any number of suitable > software packages "out there" including many good free ones, > and all the information needed to implement them. I also > know that what is often trivially easy after you've done it > a few times can be arcanely hard and ultra time consuming > first time round. I also know that the fantastic straight > forward instructions that one finds on a website somewhere > turn out to be less useful than one hopes at the time. (Even > if all they are doing is eg telling you how to turn FTP on > on an existing Windows XP Pro box). > > SO > > Can anyone suggest the quickest easiest bullet proof way of > getting FTP going. Free would be good unless there's a > 'cheap' way that stands head and shoulders above all the > 'free' options. > > I could run it instead on a Windows XP Professional PC > separate from the Apache server if that helped. (eg from > memory I think u$oft took FTP serving off XP home but left > it on Pro). > > The object is to allow me to have FTP access from China if > required. Suitable security would be 'nice'. Ability to > upload files would also be nice but download (to China) > would suffice at this stage. > > > > Russell > > -

2007\11\02@213315 by Marcel Duchamp

Jake Anderson wrote: {Quote hidden}> If he uses password authentication then your hosed. > If you use certificate auth then its ok, of course the certificate is > more than likley on the laptop. > The only way around it is some kind of jumping screen keyboard that you > enter your password on with a mouse. > Of course if they record the screen your still hosed. > > Pretty much the same with all encryption techniques. They only prevent > somebody between the two end points gaining access. If an end point is > compromised then all bets are off. > > > I spose the only way around it would be a challenge response type > password question. > you memorise some formula (or use a physical doohickey), the remote end > gives you the challenge in the form of a number (or two). You perform > some maths on that number and you reply with the answer. > > Same way passwords are authenticated now without sending the password > over the network, you just take the hashing functions from the computer > and perform them in your head or on some "trusted" device. Thanks Jake. That was what I assumed but I always get in trouble when I assume.

2007\11\02@221629 by Jake Anderson

Russell McMahon wrote: {Quote hidden}>>> Russell McMahon wrote: >>> Summary: Want to implement FTP server with minimum >>> bloodshed and effort. >>> > > >> aptitude install vsftpd >> > > I just *knew* that someone was gonna come and preach de old > time religion to me before we were through here. > > One of these days, I keep telling myself. > And, have been doing so for years. > But Windows works well enough most of the time that the > effort required to uproot a lifetime of habit and experience > is hard to come by. (AFAIR I first saw Windows running in > 1984. I had a copy of the essentially unheard of Excel 1 > with integral Windows runtime. That certainly didn';t last > long. > > One of these days ... > > > Russell > > Grab an Ubuntu live CD. stick it in the drive and reboot. One of these days becomes today. Heck if you used kubuntu apparently you could just call it "vista" and most people would just accept it. The thing i like about linux is it lets me play with all the big boy toys without paying squillions even if it doesn't actually work.

2007\11\03@021600 by Nate Duehr

On Nov 2, 2007, at 7:18 PM, Russell McMahon wrote: >>> Russell McMahon wrote: >>> Summary: Want to implement FTP server with minimum >>> bloodshed and effort. > >> aptitude install vsftpd > > I just *knew* that someone was gonna come and preach de old > time religion to me before we were through here. Heh... no ill-will meant. Windows just makes me impatient to get things done. :-) It's very similar to a conversation I had with a friend today about a NUMBER of new technologies that are supposedly consumer-ready these days... I shouldn't have to spend three days researching whether or not a $50 bluetooth headset matches all the wacky requirements for my various devices, etc... it's just not worth it. Stuff at that price point should "just work", yet it rarely does anymore. (Same thing with the HD-DVD and BluRay "war"... screw that... I'll just wait until the dust settles. Who has time for it, even with the prices now hitting $100 for a player... who wants TWO of them?) > One of these days, I keep telling myself. No rush. > And, have been doing so for years. > But Windows works well enough most of the time that the > effort required to uproot a lifetime of habit and experience > is hard to come by. (AFAIR I first saw Windows running in > 1984. I had a copy of the essentially unheard of Excel 1 > with integral Windows runtime. That certainly didn';t last > long. I don't go back that far, but I maintained a callcenter full of Win 3.1 machines and later Windows 3.11 machines, complete with QEMM and Trumpet WinSock later on... so the darn things could have IP connectivity... something every Unix system had what, 5-10 years prior? > One of these days ... No worries! No pressure. You may find that renting a virtual machine on someone else's hardware is the way to go when/if you ever decide to do it. Much less headache -- no need to learn the little minutiae of the OS loads and what-not... just log in and go... cheap too. -- Nate Duehr spamBeGonenateKILLspamTakeThisOuTnatetech.com

2007\11\03@021831 by Nate Duehr

> By the way Russell, to try to be more helpful... if all you're trying to do is have access to files on a remote machine, many of the "remote control a PC" vendors have file transfer capabilities... like the GoToMyPC folks, or whoever you like... there are multiple vendors. Perhaps you could find a "trial" offer from one of them which would work and didn't have any transfer limitations, etc... for free... that would cover the duration of your trip. Might be fun to play with too... and you'd not only have file access, but full remote control of the home PC while you were away... -- Nate Duehr EraseMEnate.....KILLspamnatetech.com

2007\11\03@024727 by Russell McMahon

>>> aptitude install vsftpd >> I just *knew* that someone was gonna come and preach de >> old >> time religion to me before we were through here. > Heh... no ill-will meant. No umbrage taken. > Windows just makes me impatient to get > things done. :-) When that happens (as it often enough does) I just drop into one of the ever open DOS boxes and use command line. And even, ach - some of my many batch files or utilities. Friend - "You don't use the mouse much, do you?" :-) Russell

2007\11\03@025023 by Russell McMahon

> By the way Russell, to try to be more helpful... if all > you're trying > to do is have access to files on a remote machine, many of > the "remote > control a PC" vendors have file transfer capabilities... > like the > GoToMyPC folks, or whoever you like... there are multiple > vendors. I tried GoToMyPC in 2003 ago prior to an international trip. Alas and stupidly it required, at least at that stage, code to be downloaded and run on the remote PC. Try getting them to let you do that in an internet cafe in Prague/Berlin/Amsterdam/Munich, or even Dublin. A total non starter at that point. Didn't stop them spamming me for years afterwards though with 'please come back, all is forgiven' entreaties. Russell

2007\11\03@025519 by Russell McMahon

A friend just recommended LogMeIn. Looks good at first look. Browser only required it says. https://secure.logmein.com/welcome/get_logmein_free/signup.asp Looks potentially valuable for support work too. R ______________________ Why do we offer LogMeIn Free? Because we can. LogMeIn has developed cutting-edge technology that allows us to offer secure and easy remote access services without the high infrastructure costs of alternatives. As a result of this superior technology, we can offer you hosted remote access 100% free. We also do not place any restrictions on commercial use of LogMeIn Free, so you can use it at home or at work. What's the catch? We offer premium versions of our remote access products for both business and support professionals. When you sign up for your Free account, you'll automatically receive a free trial of our premium service. There is zero obligation to purchase (and you can switch to the free version at any time-no need to reinstall the software). But many users opt to upgrade and purchase LogMeIn because of the productivity enhancements our premium services deliver. So that's it. Join the millions who rely on LogMeIn

2007\11\03@032428 by Jake Anderson

If remote desktop is desired try tight VNC All the regulars of VNC (java based client etc) with the bonus of file transfer. I don't however know if the java client lets you do file transfer. (probably doesn't) If you want security tunnel it through that ssh session ;-> Russell McMahon wrote: {Quote hidden}> A friend just recommended LogMeIn. > Looks good at first look. > Browser only required it says. > > https://secure.logmein.com/welcome/get_logmein_free/signup.asp > > Looks potentially valuable for support work too. > > R > > > ______________________ > > Why do we offer LogMeIn Free? Because we can. > > LogMeIn has developed cutting-edge technology that allows us > to offer secure and easy remote access services without the > high infrastructure costs of alternatives. As a result of > this superior technology, we can offer you hosted remote > access 100% free. We also do not place any restrictions on > commercial use of LogMeIn Free, so you can use it at home or > at work. > > What's the catch? > > We offer premium versions of our remote access products for > both business and support professionals. When you sign up > for your Free account, you'll automatically receive a free > trial of our premium service. There is zero obligation to > purchase (and you can switch to the free version at any > time-no need to reinstall the software). But many users opt > to upgrade and purchase LogMeIn because of the productivity > enhancements our premium services deliver. > So that's it. Join the millions who rely on LogMeIn > >

2007\11\03@034805 by Richard Prosser

UltraVNC is also a candidate - file transfer, browser access. etc. RP On 03/11/2007, Jake Anderson <spamjakevapourforge.com> wrote: {Quote hidden}> If remote desktop is desired try tight VNC > All the regulars of VNC (java based client etc) with the bonus of file > transfer. > I don't however know if the java client lets you do file transfer. > (probably doesn't) > If you want security tunnel it through that ssh session ;-> > > Russell McMahon wrote: > > A friend just recommended LogMeIn. > > Looks good at first look. > > Browser only required it says. > > > > secure.logmein.com/welcome/get_logmein_free/signup.asp > > > > Looks potentially valuable for support work too. > > > > R > > > > > > ______________________ > > > > Why do we offer LogMeIn Free? Because we can. > > > > LogMeIn has developed cutting-edge technology that allows us > > to offer secure and easy remote access services without the > > high infrastructure costs of alternatives. As a result of > > this superior technology, we can offer you hosted remote > > access 100% free. We also do not place any restrictions on > > commercial use of LogMeIn Free, so you can use it at home or > > at work. > > > > What's the catch? > > > > We offer premium versions of our remote access products for > > both business and support professionals. When you sign up > > for your Free account, you'll automatically receive a free > > trial of our premium service. There is zero obligation to > > purchase (and you can switch to the free version at any > > time-no need to reinstall the software). But many users opt > > to upgrade and purchase LogMeIn because of the productivity > > enhancements our premium services deliver. > > So that's it. Join the millions who rely on LogMeIn > > > > > > -

'=?UTF-8?B?UmU6IFtPVF0gVGNow6ouLi4u?='
2009\06\22@184610 by /* Alberto Fabiano */

Brazucas, Que tal nos comunicarmos in English para o resto do povo aqui nÃ£o se irritar? :-) []s Alberto Fabiano # alberto at (ccppbrasil.org | computer.org ) alberto.fabiano at (ieee.org | acm.org) /* # # The best way to predict the future is to invent it , Alan Key # // 0x42 0x69 0x74 0x20 0x46 0x61 0x6e */ 2009/6/22 Isaac Marino Bavaresco <isaacbavarescoSTOPspamyahoo.com.br>: {Quote hidden}> Achaste mais um. > > Regards, > > Isaac > > > > Bruno L. Albrecht [GMAIL] escreveu: >> tchÃª, tu mandou uma msg em portugues pra uma lista em q 99,9% dos posts >> sao em ingles e ainda falando com o bom sotaque aqui da terrinha! >> Ã© sÃ³ pra achar os conterrÃ¢nceos, neh? >> >> heheheh >> >> abraÃ§os! >> >> Â Bruno L. Albrecht >> Â Eng. da ComputaÃ§Ã£o/06 >> Â Falker AutomaÃ§Ã£o AgrÃcola Ltda. >> Â http://www.falker.com.br >> >> >> >> Marcus - PP5MS escreveu: >> >>> TchÃª, tinha que ter o patrocÃnio de alguem, tÃ¡ na assinatura. >>> >>> Mas mesmo assim tem louco pra tudo, certo? >>> >>> video.telegraph.co.uk/services/player/bcpid1137883380?bctid=17075685001 >>> >>> 73, >>> Marcus >>> > > __________________________________________________ > FaÃ§a ligaÃ§Ãµes para outros computadores com o novo Yahoo! Messenger > http://br.beta.messenger.yahoo.com/ > >

'[EE] FTP server and security'
2009\08\25@000941 by Brent Brown

Hi, Setting up an FTP server on my Windows XP PC, with the idea of giving certain customers accounts to upload/download relevant project files etc. Learning as I go. Had a quick look around the internet and decided to try out FileZilla from http://filezilla-project.org/ Already I've noticed some intrusion attempts... someone was attempting to login using the user name "administrator" and trying various different passwords every 10 seconds. Their IP address was in China, so I booted them off, next day similar thing but from India. So I guess this is a pretty common kind of thing... must be some robots checking port 21 on any/every IP address in the hope they can find a vulnerable FTP server. So for now I've changed the port number to a random 5 digit number in the range 0- 65535. Also changed the virtual server/port routing in my router to suit. So far, no intrusion attempts, but yet to see if there is any downside to this, assuming I will be able access into the FTP server on any nominated port number? Comments and suggestions welcomed, thanks. -- Brent Brown, Electronic Design Solutions 16 English Street, St Andrews, Hamilton 3200, New Zealand Ph: +64 7 849 0069 Fax: +64 7 849 0071 Cell: +64 27 433 4069 eMail: brent.brownSTOPspamKILLspamclear.net.nz

2009\08\25@001828 by Marcel Birthelmer

On Mon, Aug 24, 2009 at 9:09 PM, Brent Brown<@spam@brent.brown.....spamclear.net.nz> wrote: > So for now I've changed the port number to a random 5 digit number in the range 0- > 65535. Also changed the virtual server/port routing in my router to suit. So far, no > intrusion attempts, but yet to see if there is any downside to this, assuming I will be > able access into the FTP server on any nominated port number? Comments and > suggestions welcomed, thanks. Some companies don't allow outgoing traffic to ports other than, say, 80 and a few other common ones, so picking a higher port may not work. Also, I would suggest you use SFTP instead of FTP. FileZilla can handle that also.

2009\08\25@002241 by Harold Hallikainen

I don't have FTP open, but use SFTP, which uses an encrypted link (FTP over SSH). FTP sends usernames and passwords unencrypted, so it's not super safe. On SSH, I was getting thousands of failed logins a day. I now run sshblack (http://www.pettingers.org/code/sshblack.html ) and have it block IP addresses with multiple failed ssh logins and obvious attempts to break in to the system (a URL in the httpd log that includes MSOffice, or ../../../, or similar stuff). If I see a bunch of suspicious stuff in my daily log review, I add it to the "reasons" for ssh to block that IP. Now I get maybe 5 or 6 different failed logins a day. After three tries, they're blocked. Harold -- FCC Rules Updated Daily at http://www.hallikainen.com - Advertising opportunities available!

2009\08\26@081938 by Nicola Perotto

Marcel Birthelmer wrote: > On Mon, Aug 24, 2009 at 9:09 PM, Brent Brown<spambrent.brown..........clear.net.nz> wrote: > >> So for now I've changed the port number to a random 5 digit number in the range 0- >> 65535. Also changed the virtual server/port routing in my router to suit. So far, no >> intrusion attempts, but yet to see if there is any downside to this, assuming I will be >> able access into the FTP server on any nominated port number? Comments and >> suggestions welcomed, thanks. >> > > Some companies don't allow outgoing traffic to ports other than, say, > 80 and a few other common ones, so picking a higher port may not work. > Also, I would suggest you use SFTP instead of FTP. FileZilla can > handle that also. > For some reference: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ftp#Security_problems Another suggestion is ftps protocol that use SSL/TLS to encrypt the traffic. You can handle it with FileZilla, TotalCommander or Firefox with the FireFtp addon: https://addons.mozilla.org/en-US/firefox/addon/684

2009\08\27@173556 by Brent Brown

Thanks all for the replies, PIClist comes through again with a wealth of knowledge! SFTP sounds like a big improvement over FTP, so I will give that a go with FileZilla. -- Brent Brown, Electronic Design Solutions 16 English Street, St Andrews, Hamilton 3200, New Zealand Ph: +64 7 849 0069 Fax: +64 7 849 0071 Cell: +64 27 433 4069 eMail: brent.brown.....clear.net.nz

2009\08\28@070801 by Justin Richards

How do you detect the intrusions. I am (was) running xp, apache, slimftp, vnc and haven't been aware of any problems but it is becoming clear that my network is under constant attack without my knowledge. I dont run any firewalls (apart from the adsl modem is acting as a firewall to some degree), virus scanners etc. Where do I look. I check the apache logs and modem logs from time to time but appears to be nothing. Cheers Justin {Quote hidden}> > Already I've noticed some intrusion attempts... someone was attempting to > login > using the user name "administrator" and trying various different passwords > every 10 > seconds. Their IP address was in China, so I booted them off, next day > similar thing > but from India. So I guess this is a pretty common kind of thing... must be > some > robots checking port 21 on any/every IP address in the hope they can find a > vulnerable FTP server. >

2009\08\28@194507 by Brent Brown

Hi Justin, The FileZilla Server interface has a main window which lists all the FTP commands and reponses in real time - and I just happened to check it when some an intruder had been trying to login for about 1 hour. Perhaps this level of detail can be configured to appear in your log files. For what it's worth in my case simply changing the default FTP port of 21 to something harder to guess has so far prevented any intrusion attempts, but as others have said may cause some access difficulties depending on flexibility of the client software used and network limitations. Brent Justin Richards wrote: {Quote hidden}> How do you detect the intrusions. > > I am (was) running xp, apache, slimftp, vnc and haven't been aware of any > problems but it is becoming clear that my network is under constant attack > without my knowledge. I dont run any firewalls (apart from the adsl modem > is acting as a firewall to some degree), virus scanners etc. > Where do I look. I check the apache logs and modem logs from time to time > but appears to be nothing. > > Cheers Justin > > > > > Already I've noticed some intrusion attempts... someone was attempting to > > login > > using the user name "administrator" and trying various different passwords > > every 10 > > seconds. Their IP address was in China, so I booted them off, next day > > similar thing > > but from India. So I guess this is a pretty common kind of thing... must be > > some > > robots checking port 21 on any/every IP address in the hope they can find a > > vulnerable FTP server. > > > --

2009\08\28@195227 by Bob Blick

On Sat, 29 Aug 2009 11:44:09 +1200, "Brent Brown" <KILLspambrent.brownspam_OUTclear.net.nz> said: > it's worth in my case simply changing the default FTP port of 21 to > something > harder to guess has so far prevented any intrusion attempts, but as > others have If you don't have to support other users then absolutely use a nonstandard port. Cheerful regards, Bob -- http://www.fastmail.fm - Send your email first class

More... (looser matching)
- Last day of these posts
- In 2009 , 2010 only
- Today
- New search...