• Synchronet

    From The Millionaire@the.millionaire@vert.synchro.net.remove-a8p-this to Digital Man on Tue Aug 11 05:48:15 2020
    From Newsgroup: alt.bbs.synchronet

    To: Digital Man
    How about a browser with FTP built in for Synchronet? That would also be cool.

    $ The Millionaire $

    ..."Will we ever fear the ecstasy of free thought?" - Thinkman...
    --- Synchronet 3.18a-Win32 NewsLink 1.113
    * Vertrauen - Riverside County, California - telnet://vert.synchro.net
    --- Synchronet 3.19c-Linux NewsLink 1.113
  • From Nightfox@nightfox@DIGDIST.remove-ki2-this to The Millionaire on Tue Aug 11 08:31:09 2020
    From Newsgroup: alt.bbs.synchronet

    To: The Millionaire
    Re: Synchronet
    By: The Millionaire to Digital Man on Tue Aug 11 2020 05:48 am

    How about a browser with FTP built in for Synchronet? That would also be cool.

    Most web browsers are already capable of FTP.

    Nightfox

    ---
    þ Synchronet þ Digital Distortion: digitaldistortionbbs.com
    --- Synchronet 3.18a-Win32 NewsLink 1.113
    * Vertrauen - Riverside County, California - telnet://vert.synchro.net
    --- Synchronet 3.19c-Linux NewsLink 1.113
  • From Diamond Dave@diamond.dave@DMINE.remove-9xf-this to Nightfox on Tue Aug 11 14:16:27 2020
    From Newsgroup: alt.bbs.synchronet

    To: Nightfox
    Re: Synchronet
    By: The Millionaire to Digital Man on Tue Aug 11 2020 05:48 am

    How about a browser with FTP built in for Synchronet? That would also be cool.

    Most web browsers are already capable of FTP.

    Nightfox

    ---
    þ Synchronet þ Digital Distortion: digitaldistortionbbs.com

    I think Chrome disabled this. But it still works in Firefox.

    *** Diamond Dave ***

    ---
    þ Synchronet þ Diamond Mine Online BBS - bbs.dmine.net:24 - Fredericksburg, VA USA
    --- Synchronet 3.18a-Win32 NewsLink 1.113
    * Vertrauen - Riverside County, California - telnet://vert.synchro.net
    --- Synchronet 3.19c-Linux NewsLink 1.113
  • From Nightfox@nightfox@DIGDIST.remove-ayl-this to Diamond Dave on Tue Aug 11 12:32:53 2020
    From Newsgroup: alt.bbs.synchronet

    To: Diamond Dave
    Re: Re: Synchronet
    By: Diamond Dave to Nightfox on Tue Aug 11 2020 02:16 pm

    Most web browsers are already capable of FTP.

    I think Chrome disabled this. But it still works in Firefox.

    I think I've heard of some web browsers planning to disable FTP. I don't really understand that, as FTP has been an integral part of the internet and file hosting for a long time.

    Nightfox

    ---
    þ Synchronet þ Digital Distortion: digitaldistortionbbs.com
    --- Synchronet 3.18a-Win32 NewsLink 1.113
    * Vertrauen - Riverside County, California - telnet://vert.synchro.net
    --- Synchronet 3.19c-Linux NewsLink 1.113
  • From Digital Man@digital.man@vert.synchro.net.remove-5j7-this to Diamond Dave on Tue Aug 11 13:56:13 2020
    From Newsgroup: alt.bbs.synchronet

    To: Diamond Dave
    Re: Re: Synchronet
    By: Diamond Dave to Nightfox on Tue Aug 11 2020 02:16 pm

    Re: Synchronet
    By: The Millionaire to Digital Man on Tue Aug 11 2020 05:48 am

    How about a browser with FTP built in for Synchronet? That would also be cool.

    Most web browsers are already capable of FTP.

    Nightfox

    ---
    þ Synchronet þ Digital Distortion: digitaldistortionbbs.com

    I think Chrome disabled this. But it still works in Firefox.

    There's still an FTP-client built into Chrome, it just won't render files (e.g. display parsed-HTML) that it downloads via FTP.

    digital man

    This Is Spinal Tap quote #3:
    How much more black could this be? and the answer is none. None more black. Norco, CA WX: 88.1øF, 36.0% humidity, 9 mph E wind, 0.00 inches rain/24hrs
    --- Synchronet 3.18a-Win32 NewsLink 1.113
    * Vertrauen - Riverside County, California - telnet://vert.synchro.net
    --- Synchronet 3.19c-Linux NewsLink 1.113
  • From Underminer@underminer@UNDRMINE.remove-2m6-this to Nightfox on Tue Aug 11 16:28:00 2020
    From Newsgroup: alt.bbs.synchronet

    To: Nightfox
    Re: Re: Synchronet
    By: Nightfox to Diamond Dave on Tue Aug 11 2020 12:32 pm

    I think I've heard of some web browsers planning to disable FTP. I don't really understand that, as FTP has been an integral part of the internet and file hosting for a long time.

    True, but for most of that time you either needed, or really wanted to use a separate client for FTP.
    ---
    Underminer
    The Undermine BBS - bbs.undermine.ca:423
    Fidonet: 1:342/17
    ---
    þ Synchronet þ The Undermine - bbs.undermine.ca:423
    --- Synchronet 3.18a-Win32 NewsLink 1.113
    * Vertrauen - Riverside County, California - telnet://vert.synchro.net
    --- Synchronet 3.19c-Linux NewsLink 1.113
  • From Diamond Dave@diamond.dave@DMINE.remove-883-this to Underminer on Tue Aug 11 19:45:04 2020
    From Newsgroup: alt.bbs.synchronet

    To: Underminer
    Re: Re: Synchronet
    By: Underminer to Nightfox on Tue Aug 11 2020 04:28 pm

    Re: Re: Synchronet
    By: Nightfox to Diamond Dave on Tue Aug 11 2020 12:32 pm

    I think I've heard of some web browsers planning to disable FTP. I don' really understand that, as FTP has been an integral part of the interne and file hosting for a long time.

    True, but for most of that time you either needed, or really wanted to use a

    I know that a lot of people have used anonymous FTP in association with the web since the birth of the web. Even Rob does this for Synchronet file distribution (I got some files from there this past weekend).

    *** Diamond Dave ***

    ---
    þ Synchronet þ Diamond Mine Online BBS - bbs.dmine.net:24 - Fredericksburg, VA USA
    --- Synchronet 3.18a-Win32 NewsLink 1.113
    * Vertrauen - Riverside County, California - telnet://vert.synchro.net
    --- Synchronet 3.19c-Linux NewsLink 1.113
  • From Diamond Dave@diamond.dave@DMINE.remove-883-this to Digital Man on Tue Aug 11 19:43:53 2020
    From Newsgroup: alt.bbs.synchronet

    To: Digital Man
    Re: Re: Synchronet
    By: Digital Man to Diamond Dave on Tue Aug 11 2020 01:56 pm

    Re: Re: Synchronet
    By: Diamond Dave to Nightfox on Tue Aug 11 2020 02:16 pm

    Re: Synchronet
    By: The Millionaire to Digital Man on Tue Aug 11 2020 05:48 am

    How about a browser with FTP built in for Synchronet? That would also be cool.

    Most web browsers are already capable of FTP.

    Nightfox

    ---
    þ Synchronet þ Digital Distortion: digitaldistortionbbs.com

    I think Chrome disabled this. But it still works in Firefox.

    There's still an FTP-client built into Chrome, it just won't render files (e


    I was reading somewhere that some browsers don't like to use FTP because it's not secure. Not sure if that's true or not.

    *** Diamond Dave ***

    ---
    þ Synchronet þ Diamond Mine Online BBS - bbs.dmine.net:24 - Fredericksburg, VA USA
    --- Synchronet 3.18a-Win32 NewsLink 1.113
    * Vertrauen - Riverside County, California - telnet://vert.synchro.net
    --- Synchronet 3.19c-Linux NewsLink 1.113
  • From Underminer@underminer@UNDRMINE.remove-erz-this to Diamond Dave on Tue Aug 11 19:05:37 2020
    From Newsgroup: alt.bbs.synchronet

    To: Diamond Dave
    Re: Re: Synchronet
    By: Diamond Dave to Digital Man on Tue Aug 11 2020 07:43 pm

    I was reading somewhere that some browsers don't like to use FTP because it's not secure. Not sure if that's true or not.
    *** Diamond Dave ***

    That entirely depends on both what you mean by "secure" and what protocol you're actually using. Standard FTP is quite loggable and snoopable, but sftp is fairly secure. If you're transfering sensitive files, I'd hope you're not doing it in an anonymous ftp session in a browser anyways :P
    ---
    Underminer
    The Undermine BBS - bbs.undermine.ca:423
    Fidonet: 1:342/17
    ---
    þ Synchronet þ The Undermine - bbs.undermine.ca:423
    --- Synchronet 3.18a-Win32 NewsLink 1.113
    * Vertrauen - Riverside County, California - telnet://vert.synchro.net
    --- Synchronet 3.19c-Linux NewsLink 1.113
  • From Arelor@arelor@PALANT.remove-ljk-this to Diamond Dave on Wed Aug 12 02:59:30 2020
    From Newsgroup: alt.bbs.synchronet

    To: Diamond Dave
    Re: Re: Synchronet
    By: Diamond Dave to Digital Man on Tue Aug 11 2020 07:43 pm

    Re: Re: Synchronet
    By: Digital Man to Diamond Dave on Tue Aug 11 2020 01:56 pm

    Re: Re: Synchronet
    By: Diamond Dave to Nightfox on Tue Aug 11 2020 02:16 pm

    Re: Synchronet
    By: The Millionaire to Digital Man on Tue Aug 11 2020 05:48 am

    How about a browser with FTP built in for Synchronet? That would also be cool.

    Most web browsers are already capable of FTP.

    Nightfox

    ---
    ï¿­ Synchronet ï¿­ Digital Distortion: digitaldistortionbbs.com

    I think Chrome disabled this. But it still works in Firefox.

    There's still an FTP-client built into Chrome, it just won't render files (e


    I was reading somewhere that some browsers don't like to use FTP because it's not secure. Not sure if that's true or not.

    *** Diamond Dave ***


    I call horsedung on that.

    FTP has supported TLS in different modes for a lot of time already. Browsermakers always claim FTP is insecure because it does not allow encrypted sessions, and while
    it is true that a lot of ftp sites don't offer them, it is because they are offering publicly downladable material and don't see much need for encryption.

    The real problem FTP has is that it is a nightmare to filter via firewall.

    --
    gopher://gopher.operationalsecurity.es

    ---
    ï¿­ Synchronet ï¿­ Palantir BBS * palantirbbs.ddns.net * Pensacola, FL
    --- Synchronet 3.18a-Win32 NewsLink 1.113
    * Vertrauen - Riverside County, California - telnet://vert.synchro.net
    --- Synchronet 3.19c-Linux NewsLink 1.113
  • From Arelor@arelor@PALANT.remove-ljk-this to Underminer on Wed Aug 12 03:00:37 2020
    From Newsgroup: alt.bbs.synchronet

    To: Underminer
    Re: Re: Synchronet
    By: Underminer to Diamond Dave on Tue Aug 11 2020 07:05 pm

    Re: Re: Synchronet
    By: Diamond Dave to Digital Man on Tue Aug 11 2020 07:43 pm

    I was reading somewhere that some browsers don't like to use FTP because it's not secure. Not sure if that's true or not.
    *** Diamond Dave ***

    That entirely depends on both what you mean by "secure" and what protocol you're actually using. Standard FTP is quite loggable and snoopable, but sftp is fairly secu
    If you're transfering sensitive files, I'd hope you're not doing it in an anonymous ftp session in a browser anyways :P

    sftp and ftp are not related.

    sftp is a file transfer protocol over ssh. Maybe you are talking about ftps or explicit ftps?

    --
    gopher://gopher.operationalsecurity.es

    ---
    þ Synchronet þ Palantir BBS * palantirbbs.ddns.net * Pensacola, FL
    --- Synchronet 3.18a-Win32 NewsLink 1.113
    * Vertrauen - Riverside County, California - telnet://vert.synchro.net
    --- Synchronet 3.19c-Linux NewsLink 1.113
  • From Underminer@underminer@UNDRMINE.remove-mxi-this to Arelor on Wed Aug 12 02:52:02 2020
    From Newsgroup: alt.bbs.synchronet

    To: Arelor
    Re: Re: Synchronet
    By: Arelor to Underminer on Wed Aug 12 2020 03:00 am

    sftp and ftp are not related.
    sftp is a file transfer protocol over ssh. Maybe you are talking about

    You are technically correct, but in a way that kind of misses the point. Or perhaps I connected some dots mentally without being explicit enough about it.

    Yes they are different protocols, but at least in my experience the majority of public facing servers that would be accessible via browser tend to support both so they get used pretty interchangeably despite their differences; and it's not like if a browser drops support for ftp that they'd be likely to keep sftp, which is more salient to the discussion at hand. It's kind of like people refer to the world wide web and the internet interchangeably - pedantically there's significant difference there, but a lexicographer would suggest otherwise.
    ---
    Underminer
    The Undermine BBS - bbs.undermine.ca:423
    Fidonet: 1:342/17
    ---
    þ Synchronet þ The Undermine - bbs.undermine.ca:423
    --- Synchronet 3.18a-Win32 NewsLink 1.113
    * Vertrauen - Riverside County, California - telnet://vert.synchro.net
    --- Synchronet 3.19c-Linux NewsLink 1.113
  • From Tony Langdon@tony.langdon@3:633/410.remove-ngj-this to Digital Man on Wed Aug 12 18:42:00 2020
    From Newsgroup: alt.bbs.synchronet

    To: Digital Man
    On 08-11-20 13:56, Digital Man wrote to Diamond Dave <=-

    There's still an FTP-client built into Chrome, it just won't render
    files (e.g. display parsed-HTML) that it downloads via FTP.

    Firefox does the same now.


    ... Press CTRL-ALT-INS-DEL-PGDN-PGUP-END-HOME-SHIFT-PAUSE to continue...
    === MultiMail/Win v0.51
    --- SBBSecho 3.10-Linux
    * Origin: Freeway BBS Bendigo,Australia freeway.apana.org.au (3:633/410)
    --- Synchronet 3.18a-Win32 NewsLink 1.113
    * Vertrauen - Riverside County, California - telnet://vert.synchro.net
    --- Synchronet 3.19c-Linux NewsLink 1.113
  • From Tony Langdon@tony.langdon@3:633/410.remove-ngj-this to Diamond Dave on Wed Aug 12 18:46:00 2020
    From Newsgroup: alt.bbs.synchronet

    To: Diamond Dave
    On 08-11-20 19:45, Diamond Dave wrote to Underminer <=-

    I know that a lot of people have used anonymous FTP in association with the web since the birth of the web. Even Rob does this for Synchronet
    file distribution (I got some files from there this past weekend).

    As do I. I give out ftp:// URLs for things like infopacks that people can put into a browser, whether a desktop web browser or something like wget.


    ... I'm not afraid of heights. I'm afraid of widths.
    === MultiMail/Win v0.51
    --- SBBSecho 3.10-Linux
    * Origin: Freeway BBS Bendigo,Australia freeway.apana.org.au (3:633/410)
    --- Synchronet 3.18a-Win32 NewsLink 1.113
    * Vertrauen - Riverside County, California - telnet://vert.synchro.net
    --- Synchronet 3.19c-Linux NewsLink 1.113
  • From Tony Langdon@tony.langdon@3:633/410.remove-ngj-this to Underminer on Wed Aug 12 18:45:00 2020
    From Newsgroup: alt.bbs.synchronet

    To: Underminer
    On 08-11-20 16:28, Underminer wrote to Nightfox <=-

    True, but for most of that time you either needed, or really wanted to
    use a separate client for FTP.

    Depends. FOr anonymous FTP, a web browser is usually as good as any. While you can use a web browser with a private FTP account, a dedicated client can be more convenient.


    ... Gotta run! HAL just shut off the life support system again...
    === MultiMail/Win v0.51
    --- SBBSecho 3.10-Linux
    * Origin: Freeway BBS Bendigo,Australia freeway.apana.org.au (3:633/410)
    --- Synchronet 3.18a-Win32 NewsLink 1.113
    * Vertrauen - Riverside County, California - telnet://vert.synchro.net
    --- Synchronet 3.19c-Linux NewsLink 1.113
  • From Tony Langdon@tony.langdon@3:633/410.remove-ngj-this to Nightfox on Wed Aug 12 18:42:00 2020
    From Newsgroup: alt.bbs.synchronet

    To: Nightfox
    On 08-11-20 12:32, Nightfox wrote to Diamond Dave <=-

    I think I've heard of some web browsers planning to disable FTP. I
    don't really understand that, as FTP has been an integral part of the internet and file hosting for a long time.

    Yeah, that's a bit odd. FTP has a long history and works well.


    ... What is mind? No matter! What is matter? Never mind! - Homer S.
    === MultiMail/Win v0.51
    --- SBBSecho 3.10-Linux
    * Origin: Freeway BBS Bendigo,Australia freeway.apana.org.au (3:633/410)
    --- Synchronet 3.18a-Win32 NewsLink 1.113
    * Vertrauen - Riverside County, California - telnet://vert.synchro.net
    --- Synchronet 3.19c-Linux NewsLink 1.113
  • From Nightfox@nightfox@DIGDIST.remove-x60-this to Underminer on Wed Aug 12 08:49:23 2020
    From Newsgroup: alt.bbs.synchronet

    To: Underminer
    Re: Re: Synchronet
    By: Underminer to Nightfox on Tue Aug 11 2020 04:28 pm

    I think I've heard of some web browsers planning to disable FTP. I
    don't really understand that, as FTP has been an integral part of
    the internet and file hosting for a long time.

    True, but for most of that time you either needed, or really wanted to use a separate client for FTP.

    I did? If I'm just downloading a file listed on a web page, I find it's easiest just to click the link (whether it be HTTP or FTP) and download it there, rather than launch a separate FTP program, log in & brose, then download it..
    It has actually been a long time since I've launched a stand-alone FTP client to log in and browse an FTP server.

    Nightfox

    ---
    þ Synchronet þ Digital Distortion: digitaldistortionbbs.com
    --- Synchronet 3.18a-Win32 NewsLink 1.113
    * Vertrauen - Riverside County, California - telnet://vert.synchro.net
    --- Synchronet 3.19c-Linux NewsLink 1.113
  • From Ragnarok@ragnarok@DOCKSUD.remove-12it-this to Nightfox on Wed Aug 12 16:30:50 2020
    From Newsgroup: alt.bbs.synchronet

    To: Nightfox
    El 12/8/20 a las 12:49, Nightfox escribió:
    Re: Re: Synchronet
    By: Underminer to Nightfox on Tue Aug 11 2020 04:28 pm

    I think I've heard of some web browsers planning to disable FTP. I
    don't really understand that, as FTP has been an integral part of
    the internet and file hosting for a long time.

    True, but for most of that time you either needed, or really wanted to use
    a separate client for FTP.

    I did? If I'm just downloading a file listed on a web page, I find it's easiest just to click the link (whether it be HTTP or FTP) and download it there, rather than launch a separate FTP program, log in & brose, then download it..
    It has actually been a long time since I've launched a stand-alone FTP client to log in and browse an FTP server.

    Nightfox

    I use webv4 and download files http should be the default for me..
    Then someone has to fix the long names support to work

    ---
    ï¿­ Synchronet ï¿­ Dock Sud BBS TLD 24 HS - bbs.docksud.com.ar
    --- Synchronet 3.18a-Win32 NewsLink 1.113
    * Vertrauen - Riverside County, California - telnet://vert.synchro.net
    --- Synchronet 3.19c-Linux NewsLink 1.113
  • From Ragnarok@ragnarok@DOCKSUD.remove-12it-this to Underminer on Wed Aug 12 16:27:22 2020
    From Newsgroup: alt.bbs.synchronet

    To: Underminer
    El 11/8/20 a las 19:28, Underminer escribió:
    Re: Re: Synchronet
    By: Nightfox to Diamond Dave on Tue Aug 11 2020 12:32 pm

    I think I've heard of some web browsers planning to disable FTP. I don't really understand that, as FTP has been an integral part of the internet and file hosting for a long time.

    True, but for most of that time you either needed, or really wanted to use a separate client for FTP.

    FileZilla do the job

    ---
    ï¿­ Synchronet ï¿­ Dock Sud BBS TLD 24 HS - bbs.docksud.com.ar
    --- Synchronet 3.18a-Win32 NewsLink 1.113
    * Vertrauen - Riverside County, California - telnet://vert.synchro.net
    --- Synchronet 3.19c-Linux NewsLink 1.113
  • From MRO@mro@BBSESINF.remove-7sc-this to Tony Langdon on Wed Aug 12 21:38:07 2020
    From Newsgroup: alt.bbs.synchronet

    To: Tony Langdon
    Re: Re: Synchronet
    By: Tony Langdon to Nightfox on Wed Aug 12 2020 06:42 pm

    On 08-11-20 12:32, Nightfox wrote to Diamond Dave <=-

    I think I've heard of some web browsers planning to disable FTP. I
    don't really understand that, as FTP has been an integral part of
    the internet and file hosting for a long time.

    Yeah, that's a bit odd. FTP has a long history and works well.


    except when it doesnt!
    ---
    þ Synchronet þ ::: BBSES.info - free BBS services :::
    --- Synchronet 3.18a-Win32 NewsLink 1.113
    * Vertrauen - Riverside County, California - telnet://vert.synchro.net
    --- Synchronet 3.19c-Linux NewsLink 1.113
  • From Tony Langdon@tony.langdon@3:633/410.remove-xpb-this to MRO on Thu Aug 13 19:56:00 2020
    From Newsgroup: alt.bbs.synchronet

    To: MRO
    On 08-12-20 21:38, MRO wrote to Tony Langdon <=-

    Yeah, that's a bit odd. FTP has a long history and works well.


    except when it doesnt!

    That's only because of NAT routers, which FTP wasn't designed for. IPv6 can get around that (or a new router with a properly working FTP proxy). :)


    ... The way some people find fault - you'd think there was a reward.
    === MultiMail/Win v0.51
    --- SBBSecho 3.10-Linux
    * Origin: Freeway BBS Bendigo,Australia freeway.apana.org.au (3:633/410)
    --- Synchronet 3.18a-Win32 NewsLink 1.113
    * Vertrauen - Riverside County, California - telnet://vert.synchro.net
    --- Synchronet 3.19c-Linux NewsLink 1.113
  • From Vk3jed@vk3jed@FREEWAY.remove-xpb-this to Tracker1 on Thu Aug 13 20:18:00 2020
    From Newsgroup: alt.bbs.synchronet

    To: Tracker1
    On 08-13-20 01:27, Tracker1 wrote to Tony Langdon <=-

    @VIA: VERT/TRN
    On 8/12/2020 1:42 AM, Tony Langdon wrote:

    Yeah, that's a bit odd. FTP has a long history and works well.

    The browser makers are pushing for secure connections for everything.
    If you're downloading fron an FTP (non-S) site, then a man in the
    middle can inject a virus into your download.

    Good point.

    HTTP(S) is pretty efficient for downloads, and barring a couple of FTP features works as well for most users... and by most, really all but a very tiny fraction of users and browsers never supported those features
    in the first place.

    Well, HTTP(S) works better these days. There was a time on iffy connections, the download would just stop, but the browser would say it was complete. Something FTP never did to me. Tha used to piss me off when I was on slow Internet and HTTP would keep dropping out. Thankfully, it doesn't seem to happen these days. For a while, I used FTP by preference, because it "just worked". :)


    ... Miss Stove seems to be going off the boil.
    --- MultiMail/Win v0.51
    þ Synchronet þ Freeway BBS, Bendigo Australia. freeway.apana.org.au
    --- Synchronet 3.18a-Win32 NewsLink 1.113
    * Vertrauen - Riverside County, California - telnet://vert.synchro.net
    --- Synchronet 3.19c-Linux NewsLink 1.113
  • From Tracker1@tracker1@TRN.remove-xpb-this to The Millionaire on Thu Aug 13 01:18:31 2020
    From Newsgroup: alt.bbs.synchronet

    To: The Millionaire
    On 8/11/2020 5:48 AM, The Millionaire wrote:
    How about a browser with FTP built in for Synchronet? That would also be cool.

    Most browsers used to have FTP built in... though iirc chrome and
    firefox both removed it this past year or so.
    --
    Michael J. Ryan
    tracker1 +o Roughneck BBS

    ---
    þ Synchronet þ Roughneck BBS - coming back 2/2/20
    --- Synchronet 3.18a-Win32 NewsLink 1.113
    * Vertrauen - Riverside County, California - telnet://vert.synchro.net
    --- Synchronet 3.19c-Linux NewsLink 1.113
  • From Tracker1@tracker1@TRN.remove-xpb-this to Tony Langdon on Thu Aug 13 01:27:00 2020
    From Newsgroup: alt.bbs.synchronet

    To: Tony Langdon
    On 8/12/2020 1:42 AM, Tony Langdon wrote:

    Yeah, that's a bit odd. FTP has a long history and works well.

    The browser makers are pushing for secure connections for everything.
    If you're downloading fron an FTP (non-S) site, then a man in the middle
    can inject a virus into your download.

    HTTP(S) is pretty efficient for downloads, and barring a couple of FTP features works as well for most users... and by most, really all but a
    very tiny fraction of users and browsers never supported those features
    in the first place.

    They want to dump what is effectively a lot of (mostly unmaintained)
    code, for an insecure protocol that almost nobody uses in the wild.
    --
    Michael J. Ryan
    tracker1 +o Roughneck BBS

    ---
    þ Synchronet þ Roughneck BBS - coming back 2/2/20
    --- Synchronet 3.18a-Win32 NewsLink 1.113
    * Vertrauen - Riverside County, California - telnet://vert.synchro.net
    --- Synchronet 3.19c-Linux NewsLink 1.113
  • From Tracker1@tracker1@TRN.remove-xpb-this to Nightfox on Thu Aug 13 01:21:55 2020
    From Newsgroup: alt.bbs.synchronet

    To: Nightfox
    On 8/11/2020 12:32 PM, Nightfox wrote:
    I think Chrome disabled this. But it still works in Firefox.

    I think I've heard of some web browsers planning to disable FTP.
    I don't really understand that, as FTP has been an integral part
    of the internet and file hosting for a long time.

    File downloads via HTTP(s) are about as effective and the browser devs
    don't like the idea of ongoing support for an insecure protocol. They'd rather cut code that isn't used much in practice, adding SFTP would be a
    huge undertaking, and FTPS/FTPES would again be more work, and almost
    entirely unused as from the start, http downloads work fine.
    --
    Michael J. Ryan
    tracker1 +o Roughneck BBS

    ---
    þ Synchronet þ Roughneck BBS - coming back 2/2/20
    --- Synchronet 3.18a-Win32 NewsLink 1.113
    * Vertrauen - Riverside County, California - telnet://vert.synchro.net
    --- Synchronet 3.19c-Linux NewsLink 1.113
  • From Nightfox@nightfox@DIGDIST.remove-xpb-this to Tracker1 on Thu Aug 13 08:52:25 2020
    From Newsgroup: alt.bbs.synchronet

    To: Tracker1
    Re: Re: Synchronet
    By: Tracker1 to Nightfox on Thu Aug 13 2020 01:21 am

    File downloads via HTTP(s) are about as effective and the browser devs don't like the idea of ongoing support for an insecure protocol. They'd rather cut code that isn't used much in practice, adding SFTP would be a huge undertaking, and FTPS/FTPES would again be more work, and almost entirely unused as from the start, http downloads work fine.

    I know HTTP downloads work fine.. But then anyone running file servers would need to switch their file server from FTP to a web server. I guess that's not that difficult though. But as far as an insecure protocol, if you have files publicly available for anonymous download, does it really matter if it's secure?

    Nightfox

    ---
    þ Synchronet þ Digital Distortion: digitaldistortionbbs.com
    --- Synchronet 3.18a-Win32 NewsLink 1.113
    * Vertrauen - Riverside County, California - telnet://vert.synchro.net
    --- Synchronet 3.19c-Linux NewsLink 1.113
  • From Utopian Galt@utopian.galt@IUTOPIA.remove-7ll-this to Nightfox on Sat Aug 15 18:11:00 2020
    From Newsgroup: alt.bbs.synchronet

    To: Nightfox
    Most web browsers are already capable of FTP.

    However the functionality is being erroded gradually, filezilla is a good alternative.
    --- Synchronet 3.18a-Win32 NewsLink 1.113
    * Vertrauen - Riverside County, California - telnet://vert.synchro.net
    --- Synchronet 3.19c-Linux NewsLink 1.113
  • From Utopian Galt@utopian.galt@IUTOPIA.remove-7ll-this to The Millionaire on Sat Aug 15 18:10:00 2020
    From Newsgroup: alt.bbs.synchronet

    To: The Millionaire
    How about a browser with FTP built in for Synchronet? That would also be cool.

    I think that would be kind of crazy, but perhaps a js ftp client as a door might be an idea.
    --- Synchronet 3.18a-Win32 NewsLink 1.113
    * Vertrauen - Riverside County, California - telnet://vert.synchro.net
    --- Synchronet 3.19c-Linux NewsLink 1.113
  • From MRO@mro@BBSESINF.remove-qgh-this to Tony Langdon on Sat Aug 15 23:58:13 2020
    From Newsgroup: alt.bbs.synchronet

    To: Tony Langdon
    Re: Re: Synchronet
    By: Tony Langdon to MRO on Thu Aug 13 2020 07:56 pm

    On 08-12-20 21:38, MRO wrote to Tony Langdon <=-

    Yeah, that's a bit odd. FTP has a long history and works well.


    except when it doesnt!

    That's only because of NAT routers, which FTP wasn't designed for. IPv6 can get around that (or a new router with a properly working FTP proxy). :)


    sounds like a lot of work arounds for a fucking protocol that dont work well. ---
    þ Synchronet þ ::: BBSES.info - free BBS services :::
    --- Synchronet 3.18a-Win32 NewsLink 1.113
    * Vertrauen - Riverside County, California - telnet://vert.synchro.net
    --- Synchronet 3.19c-Linux NewsLink 1.113
  • From Nightfox@nightfox@DIGDIST.remove-nd3-this to Utopian Galt on Sat Aug 15 22:20:48 2020
    From Newsgroup: alt.bbs.synchronet

    To: Utopian Galt
    Re: Re: Synchronet
    By: Utopian Galt to Nightfox on Sat Aug 15 2020 06:11 pm

    Most web browsers are already capable of FTP.

    However the functionality is being erroded gradually, filezilla is a good alternative.

    Sometimes it's easier to just click a download link in a web browser though.. I think the average user isn't going to want to install an FTP client, add the site to their list, and browse the FTP site to download a file.

    Nightfox

    ---
    þ Synchronet þ Digital Distortion: digitaldistortionbbs.com
    --- Synchronet 3.18a-Win32 NewsLink 1.113
    * Vertrauen - Riverside County, California - telnet://vert.synchro.net
    --- Synchronet 3.19c-Linux NewsLink 1.113
  • From Nightfox@nightfox@DIGDIST.remove-nd3-this to Utopian Galt on Sat Aug 15 22:27:57 2020
    From Newsgroup: alt.bbs.synchronet

    To: Utopian Galt
    Re: Re: Synchronet
    By: Utopian Galt to The Millionaire on Sat Aug 15 2020 06:10 pm

    How about a browser with FTP built in for Synchronet? That would
    also be cool.

    I think that would be kind of crazy, but perhaps a js ftp client as a door might be an idea.

    Around 1994 or 1995, I saw some BBSes in my area that provided some sort of FTP functionality. As a user on the BBS, you could go download files from FTP sites to the BBS and then download them from the BBS.

    Nightfox

    ---
    þ Synchronet þ Digital Distortion: digitaldistortionbbs.com
    --- Synchronet 3.18a-Win32 NewsLink 1.113
    * Vertrauen - Riverside County, California - telnet://vert.synchro.net
    --- Synchronet 3.19c-Linux NewsLink 1.113
  • From Ennev@ennev@MTLGEEK.remove-rcv-this to Utopian Galt on Sun Aug 16 13:55:54 2020
    From Newsgroup: alt.bbs.synchronet

    To: Utopian Galt
    On 2020-08-15 2:11 p.m., Utopian Galt wrote:
    Ni> Most web browsers are already capable of FTP.

    However the functionality is being erroded gradually, filezilla is a good alternative.


    https://www.zdnet.com/article/firefox-to-remove-support-for-the-ftp-protocol/

    Firefox is dropping it not sure but chrome may already have dropped it.

    ---
    þ Synchronet þ MtlGeek - Geeks in Montreal - http://mtlgeek.com/ -
    --- Synchronet 3.18a-Win32 NewsLink 1.113
    * Vertrauen - Riverside County, California - telnet://vert.synchro.net
    --- Synchronet 3.19c-Linux NewsLink 1.113
  • From Tracker1@tracker1@TRN.remove-11jv-this to Nightfox on Mon Aug 17 03:53:02 2020
    From Newsgroup: alt.bbs.synchronet

    To: Nightfox
    On 8/13/2020 8:52 AM, Nightfox wrote:

    I know HTTP downloads work fine.. But then anyone running file servers would need to switch their file server from FTP to a web server. I guess that's not that difficult though. But as far as an insecure protocol, if you have files publicly available for anonymous download, does it really matter if it's secure?

    Man-In-The-Middle attack.
    --
    Michael J. Ryan
    tracker1 +o Roughneck BBS

    ---
    þ Synchronet þ Roughneck BBS - coming back 2/2/20
    --- Synchronet 3.18a-Win32 NewsLink 1.113
    * Vertrauen - Riverside County, California - telnet://vert.synchro.net
    --- Synchronet 3.19c-Linux NewsLink 1.113
  • From Tracker1@tracker1@TRN.remove-rxf-this to Utopian Galt on Mon Aug 17 04:17:36 2020
    From Newsgroup: alt.bbs.synchronet

    To: Utopian Galt
    On 8/15/2020 11:10 AM, Utopian Galt wrote:
    TM> How about a browser with FTP built in for Synchronet? That would also be
    TM> cool.

    I think that would be kind of crazy, but perhaps a js ftp client as a door might be an idea.

    Then people could use your BBS to try to brute force another system...
    Relay services should only really connect to systems that opt in, and
    post the data necessary to report/follow potentially illicit activity.
    --
    Michael J. Ryan
    tracker1 +o Roughneck BBS

    ---
    þ Synchronet þ Roughneck BBS - coming back 2/2/20
    --- Synchronet 3.18a-Win32 NewsLink 1.113
    * Vertrauen - Riverside County, California - telnet://vert.synchro.net
    --- Synchronet 3.19c-Linux NewsLink 1.113
  • From Digital Man@digital.man@vert.synchro.net.remove-3hd-this to Tracker1 on Mon Aug 17 11:51:33 2020
    From Newsgroup: alt.bbs.synchronet

    To: Tracker1
    Re: Re: Synchronet
    By: Tracker1 to Nightfox on Mon Aug 17 2020 03:53 am

    On 8/13/2020 8:52 AM, Nightfox wrote:

    I know HTTP downloads work fine.. But then anyone running file servers would need to switch their file server from FTP to a web server. I guess that's not that difficult though. But as far as an insecure protocol, if you have files publicly available for anonymous download, does it really matter if it's secure?

    Man-In-The-Middle attack.

    Practically speaking, not a concern today. Perhaps in the future there will be more nefarious "men" in between the typical client and server on the Internet, but I doubt that.

    digital man

    Sling Blade quote #8:
    Karl Childers: I don't reckon I got no reason to kill nobody.
    Norco, CA WX: 90.4øF, 44.0% humidity, 0 mph WNW wind, 0.00 inches rain/24hrs --- Synchronet 3.18a-Win32 NewsLink 1.113
    * Vertrauen - Riverside County, California - telnet://vert.synchro.net
    --- Synchronet 3.19c-Linux NewsLink 1.113
  • From Denn@denn@OUTWEST.remove-6do-this to The Millionaire on Tue Aug 18 00:59:04 2020
    From Newsgroup: alt.bbs.synchronet

    To: The Millionaire
    Re: Synchronet
    By: The Millionaire to Digital Man on Tue Aug 11 2020 05:48 am

    How about a browser with FTP built in for Synchronet? That would also be cool.

    HUH?
    Just use your favorite browser and goto you synchronet webpage.
    why would you need a specialized browser???

    ---
    þ Synchronet þ outwestbbs.com - the Outwest BBS
    --- Synchronet 3.18a-Win32 NewsLink 1.113
    * Vertrauen - Riverside County, California - telnet://vert.synchro.net
    --- Synchronet 3.19c-Linux NewsLink 1.113