Apparently someone really doesn't want me to have a server! - Page 2

Daz · 04-07-2008, 11:41

Yep, but it's not as simple as a third party product will likely be.

My main problem is it relies on Windows authentication - ie, the user accounts on the box. I dont like the idea of something being able to brute force Windows users accounts through an arbitrary service like FTP. Worse is that to work via FTP those accounts need 'Log on Locally' as a permission.

Bad medicine.

Burble · 04-07-2008, 11:51

The FTP service in IIS is to be avoided. Personally I think IIS as a whole is a steaming pile of crap but that's another story.

There are plenty of decent third party FTP servers available if you insist on using FTP but you can also setup an SCP server to secure things a little bit. Then use WinSCP (or similar) to access the box.

LeperousDust · 04-07-2008, 16:42

What third party FTP would you suggest, open to offers

Also what the fudge is SCP, never heard of it, but sounds like it could be to do with remotely admining my box (which would be nice

). What would you suggest in that case? Oh i've just looked it up, Secure Copy i presume, sounds interesting, but probably not what i need really

Burble · 04-07-2008, 17:13

ArGoSoft FTP Server is the one that I've used most.

SCP = Secure Copy Protocol, basically file transfer over SSH. If you're considering FTP then SCP is what you really need, think of it as FTP with encryption.

You'll either need to pay for or 'obtain' a license for any decent FTP server but OpenSSH (which you need for SCP) is free. For me it's an absolute no brainer - SCP all the way.

LeperousDust · 06-07-2008, 09:27

Whats the differences between SCP SFTP FTP over SSL and god knows what else there is out there!

? I'm having a play around with difference software to see which i like, but this is confusing me.

LeperousDust · 06-07-2008, 16:17

Right got my FTP set up nicely it seems, using FTPS as opposed to SFTP, so slightly more overhead but for what I'm doing it doesn't matter

Next question, why do i need IIS hogging port 80? Will disabling break loads of other things i depend upon? Because personally I'd rather run Apache (i know this is why i should be using ubuntu

but ubuntus server storage is still not as elegant/easy as WHS). I've got WAMP installed and stopped the IIS service and started Apache and everything is fine, so I'm assuming i can go without, I'll just lose out on Microsoft's special web gateway thingy (which i don't really care about too much) and probably media connect which is also irrelevant so far.

Or is there a way i can make them play nice together?

Burble · 06-07-2008, 16:22

FTPS, SFTP and so on are pretty much variations on the theme. They are all slightly different but do the same thing ultimately. There are fors and againsts for all of them. My personal preference is SCP but if you've got FPTS up and running then jobs a goodun

As long as you're not using the inbuilt HTTP, SMTP, POP3, IMAP4 or NNTP stuff then you can disable IIS. Apache urinates all over IIS in my opinion. The only reason I have IIS loaded on two of my VM's (my email platform is a bunch of VM's on an ESX server) is that I'm running Exchange 2003 which relies on IIS for SMTP, NNTP, POP3 and IMAP4.

LeperousDust · 06-07-2008, 16:36

Can't image why i will be using any of those services, it also disables media connect, but i can do without that too. Yay for WAMP!

This is all coming together quite well for possibly the first time ever (tempting fate).

Now I've got Apache up and running i need to do a lot of playing because i want to be able to setup web access that requires used login and displays different root folders depending on who's logged on. I haven't even looked in to what i need to do here as of yet, but i assume its going to be a little technical from here on. Great...

Burble · 06-07-2008, 16:41

If you can have is to that different people go to a different URL, ie http://server/alex & http://server/anotherperson then it's a doddle. Have a look at .htaccess files. You can either have that as a file on the filesystem or have it in the Apache config.

LeperousDust · 06-07-2008, 16:57

I see, makes sense, i still need some kind of password though on a per user basis. Theres probably something i can install that does this though, just need to find it

04-07-2008, 11:41	#11
Daz The Stig Join Date: Jun 2006 Location: Swad! Posts: 10,713	Yep, but it's not as simple as a third party product will likely be. My main problem is it relies on Windows authentication - ie, the user accounts on the box. I dont like the idea of something being able to brute force Windows users accounts through an arbitrary service like FTP. Worse is that to work via FTP those accounts need 'Log on Locally' as a permission. Bad medicine. __________________ apt-get moo

04-07-2008, 16:42	#13
LeperousDust Bananaman Join Date: Jul 2006 Location: Liverpool/Edinburgh Posts: 4,817	What third party FTP would you suggest, open to offers Also what the fudge is SCP, never heard of it, but sounds like it could be to do with remotely admining my box (which would be nice ). What would you suggest in that case? Oh i've just looked it up, Secure Copy i presume, sounds interesting, but probably not what i need really __________________

06-07-2008, 09:27	#15
LeperousDust Bananaman Join Date: Jul 2006 Location: Liverpool/Edinburgh Posts: 4,817	Whats the differences between SCP SFTP FTP over SSL and god knows what else there is out there! ? I'm having a play around with difference software to see which i like, but this is confusing me. __________________

06-07-2008, 16:17	#16
LeperousDust Bananaman Join Date: Jul 2006 Location: Liverpool/Edinburgh Posts: 4,817	Right got my FTP set up nicely it seems, using FTPS as opposed to SFTP, so slightly more overhead but for what I'm doing it doesn't matter Next question, why do i need IIS hogging port 80? Will disabling break loads of other things i depend upon? Because personally I'd rather run Apache (i know this is why i should be using ubuntu but ubuntus server storage is still not as elegant/easy as WHS). I've got WAMP installed and stopped the IIS service and started Apache and everything is fine, so I'm assuming i can go without, I'll just lose out on Microsoft's special web gateway thingy (which i don't really care about too much) and probably media connect which is also irrelevant so far. Or is there a way i can make them play nice together? __________________

06-07-2008, 16:36	#18
LeperousDust Bananaman Join Date: Jul 2006 Location: Liverpool/Edinburgh Posts: 4,817	Can't image why i will be using any of those services, it also disables media connect, but i can do without that too. Yay for WAMP! This is all coming together quite well for possibly the first time ever (tempting fate). Now I've got Apache up and running i need to do a lot of playing because i want to be able to setup web access that requires used login and displays different root folders depending on who's logged on. I haven't even looked in to what i need to do here as of yet, but i assume its going to be a little technical from here on. Great... __________________

04-07-2008, 11:51	#12
Burble Rocket Fuel Join Date: Jul 2006 Posts: 7,826	The FTP service in IIS is to be avoided. Personally I think IIS as a whole is a steaming pile of crap but that's another story. There are plenty of decent third party FTP servers available if you insist on using FTP but you can also setup an SCP server to secure things a little bit. Then use WinSCP (or similar) to access the box.

04-07-2008, 17:13	#14
Burble Rocket Fuel Join Date: Jul 2006 Posts: 7,826	ArGoSoft FTP Server is the one that I've used most. SCP = Secure Copy Protocol, basically file transfer over SSH. If you're considering FTP then SCP is what you really need, think of it as FTP with encryption. You'll either need to pay for or 'obtain' a license for any decent FTP server but OpenSSH (which you need for SCP) is free. For me it's an absolute no brainer - SCP all the way.

06-07-2008, 16:22	#17
Burble Rocket Fuel Join Date: Jul 2006 Posts: 7,826	FTPS, SFTP and so on are pretty much variations on the theme. They are all slightly different but do the same thing ultimately. There are fors and againsts for all of them. My personal preference is SCP but if you've got FPTS up and running then jobs a goodun As long as you're not using the inbuilt HTTP, SMTP, POP3, IMAP4 or NNTP stuff then you can disable IIS. Apache urinates all over IIS in my opinion. The only reason I have IIS loaded on two of my VM's (my email platform is a bunch of VM's on an ESX server) is that I'm running Exchange 2003 which relies on IIS for SMTP, NNTP, POP3 and IMAP4.

06-07-2008, 16:41	#19
Burble Rocket Fuel Join Date: Jul 2006 Posts: 7,826	If you can have is to that different people go to a different URL, ie http://server/alex & http://server/anotherperson then it's a doddle. Have a look at .htaccess files. You can either have that as a file on the filesystem or have it in the Apache config.

06-07-2008, 16:57	#20
LeperousDust Bananaman Join Date: Jul 2006 Location: Liverpool/Edinburgh Posts: 4,817	I see, makes sense, i still need some kind of password though on a per user basis. Theres probably something i can install that does this though, just need to find it __________________

Thread Tools
Show Printable Version Email this Page
Display Modes
Linear Mode Switch to Hybrid Mode Switch to Threaded Mode