|
> From: Evan Harris > > > I am fairly sure I understand how FTP works, although I will confess to > not being particularly aware of the ".." exploit. These are somewhat contradictory statements. If you don't know the basics of the IFS (or any hierarchical file system), then you really don't know much about how the FTP server or any of the other Unix-like utilities works. You may know how to use the FTP client, but you really don't know that much about FTP. That aside, I see your dilemma. You have an NT guy who says he can make data available simply and easily, and you have to compete with that. However, the more I look at that argument, the more I have a problem. Your primary argument boils down to this: if I don't do what the NT guy says HE can do, then I will lose the iSeries. That's really the crux of the biscuit: you have to keep up with the NT guy or else your company will abandon the iSeries. If this were entirely true then you would have no control over security and access to your data. You simply have to do whatever the NT guy says he can do. This to me is frightening. Since the SQL guy can also just as easily update the data, do you have to allow update access as well? If not, why not? Probably because you can make a reasoned argument that you need business rules to protect the integrity of the data. But the point is that you don't have to do everything the NT guy says. So the real issue is not keeping up with the NT guy, it's providing fast access to the data. Why do you need fast FTP access to your data? In what situation does it make sense to download entire files to some other machine? How many rows are we talking about? If it's not that many rows, how long does it take to make a copy? If it's a lot of rows, wouldn't it be faster to download only a portion of the data? And in that case, you're no longer talking FTP. Really, I'm interested to know what purpose is served by FTP that can't be handled with 15 minutes of programming, or how big a file it is that copying it to a holding area actually takes too long for the end user. The point is not that you don't have a legitimate need for FTP, Evan. I don't know your shop. I'm just pointing out that the majority of uses I've seen of FTP are simply to save the IT guy some time, and it's done at the expense of security. And as I've always said, those who are willing to sacrifice security in order to make their job a little easier deserve neither. Joe
As an Amazon Associate we earn from qualifying purchases.
This mailing list archive is Copyright 1997-2024 by midrange.com and David Gibbs as a compilation work. Use of the archive is restricted to research of a business or technical nature. Any other uses are prohibited. Full details are available on our policy page. If you have questions about this, please contact [javascript protected email address].
Operating expenses for this site are earned using the Amazon Associate program and Google Adsense.