Print

Please login or register.
1 Hour 1 Day 1 Week 1 Month Forever
Login with username, password and session length

[Crazydad]

Right Guvnor. Have a look at this. It's not entirely free but it does work and it's perfect for I.T. numskulls like us. I tried it out but decided not to go for the paid service as I wouldn't get enough use out of it. Of course, both P.C.s need to be on for it to work but I guess that's the same whatever you try.

Let us know what you think.

 

now that sounds good also while looking i found this is
http://fileforum.betanews.com/detail/Hamachi_for_Windows/1104137509/1
i think t
says itīs all free or am i missing something??

[Golfbuddy]

Right Guvnor. Have a look at this. It's not entirely free but it does work and it's perfect for I.T. numskulls like us. I tried it out but decided not to go for the paid service as I wouldn't get enough use out of it. Of course, both P.C.s need to be on for it to work but I guess that's the same whatever you try.

Let us know what you think.

 

now that sounds good also while looking i found this is
http://fileforum.betanews.com/detail/Hamachi_for_Windows/1104137509/1
i think t
says itīs all free or am i missing something??

Looks like there's a free and premium version. Why not download it and try it out? Don't forget to set a system restore point and do a back up first though. You never know what some of these things do to your system.  

[TheBoy]

I asked what the OS is on both machines, rather than assume

Yes, encrypting the link will slow things down, but having a server running on the internet that accepts clear text logins is too much of a downfall to me. Unless you don't care for who gets into it and accesses your files... really depends on whether there's anything you consider personal or confidential on there.

Yes he did say no techie talk, but I'd rather first find out exactly what problem needs to be solved then state what I consider the best approach, rather than give a "one size fits all" when it may actually be a poor fit. 8-)

I think it was pretty obvious they were going to be XP PCs....

Virtually every webhost has std ftp open to internet, and correctly set up, is normally OK.  Granted, people in the right (priveledged) places on the net can sniff the password, hence why you should change password at least monthly.

All of our Internet facing servers that have been 'hit' haven't been via FTP, but due to Linux's usual problem with iptables being flakey under heavy use (have to use iptables, as proper, dedicated firewalls are too slow for some applications).


For this application - swapping files, possibly large ones - straight FTP is easy to set up and performs well

[HI2DVY]

Cisco have a VPN Client for Vista (32 bit version only).

Would a copy of that help? - trial version obviously, wouldn't want to break any laws now would we?

Dave

[Crazydad]

As he said no techie talk, I assumed Windows, so no rsync or similar. May be able to do it via cygwin, but that product is poor.

Any form of tunnelling (inc SSL) is encapsulated. If the files are large, as implicated, this will have a massive hit on throughput, esp as (again assuming) likely simple broadband links.

I asked what the OS is on both machines, rather than assume

Yes, encrypting the link will slow things down, but having a server running on the internet that accepts clear text logins is too much of a downfall to me. Unless you don't care for who gets into it and accesses your files... really depends on whether there's anything you consider personal or confidential on there.

Yes he did say no techie talk, but I'd rather first find out exactly what problem needs to be solved then state what I consider the best approach, rather than give a "one size fits all" when it may actually be a poor fit. 8-)

well both use windows xp home  and all that is neede is a (free) way of transfering files from on pc to another, no need to access my pc  from any other places  

[TheBoy]

As he said no techie talk, I assumed Windows, so no rsync or similar. May be able to do it via cygwin, but that product is poor.

Any form of tunnelling (inc SSL) is encapsulated. If the files are large, as implicated, this will have a massive hit on throughput, esp as (again assuming) likely simple broadband links.

I asked what the OS is on both machines, rather than assume

Yes, encrypting the link will slow things down, but having a server running on the internet that accepts clear text logins is too much of a downfall to me. Unless you don't care for who gets into it and accesses your files... really depends on whether there's anything you consider personal or confidential on there.

Yes he did say no techie talk, but I'd rather first find out exactly what problem needs to be solved then state what I consider the best approach, rather than give a "one size fits all" when it may actually be a poor fit. 8-)

well both use windows xp home  and all that is neede is a (free) way of transfering files from on pc to another, no need to access my pc  from any other places  

You have a FTP server on each (may need to install from the XP CD).  As previously said, the free Filezilla FTP client is fine.  Just need to (possibly) set up your routers to allow it.  If you are on dynamic IP addresses, may need to use a dynamic dns service...

[Crazydad]

what do you think of this http://www.goldenftpserver.com/

[TheBoy]

what do you think of this http://www.goldenftpserver.com/

You have a pretty reasonable FTP server built in to XP - part of IIS...

[Crazydad]

what do you think of this http://www.goldenftpserver.com/

You have a pretty reasonable FTP server built in to XP - part of IIS...

can you run me through an activation route??

nice and slow

[TheBoy]

what do you think of this http://www.goldenftpserver.com/

You have a pretty reasonable FTP server built in to XP - part of IIS...

can you run me through an activation route??

nice and slow

control panel > add/remove programs > windows components
highligh internet information services (not tick), then tick Filetransfter protocol (ftp), click ok, its installed.

[Crazydad]

what do you think of this http://www.goldenftpserver.com/

You have a pretty reasonable FTP server built in to XP - part of IIS...

can you run me through an activation route??

nice and slow

control panel > add/remove programs > windows components
highligh internet information services (not tick), then tick Filetransfter protocol (ftp), click ok, its installed.

and what then??

[TheBoy]

what do you think of this http://www.goldenftpserver.com/

You have a pretty reasonable FTP server built in to XP - part of IIS...

can you run me through an activation route??

nice and slow

control panel > add/remove programs > windows components
highligh internet information services (not tick), then tick Filetransfter protocol (ftp), click ok, its installed.

and what then??

install filezilla (search for it on google), then test it locally.

then, you may need to configure port forwardimg and firewalls...

[Paul M]

I think it was pretty obvious they were going to be XP PCs....

On the balance of probabilities it's likely (especially for the local PC) but I never like to assume in these cases -- the remote box could have been anything.

Virtually every webhost has std ftp open to internet, and correctly set up, is normally OK.  Granted, people in the right (priveledged) places on the net can sniff the password, hence why you should change password at least monthly.

Yes, and POP3/IMAP mail servers, and SMTP servers authenticated only by IP address etc. It works, but I consider it to be a bit of a joke and they only do it because it's cheap and they couldn't care less about their customers' data/information integrity.

All of our Internet facing servers that have been 'hit' haven't been via FTP, but due to Linux's usual problem with iptables being flakey under heavy use (have to use iptables, as proper, dedicated firewalls are too slow for some applications).


For this application - swapping files, possibly large ones - straight FTP is easy to set up and performs well

It does perform well in purely terms of getting the file from A to B efficiently, and I consider it to be ideal for public servers that allow anonymous access. But personally I'd never put anything I'm remotely concerned about becoming public onto a standard FTP server -- if it's some holiday snaps then I wouldn't worry, but if it's finance spreadsheets I would. Depends how paranoid you are really, and I guess I rank quite high on the scale when it comes to computer security

[Martin_1962]

VPN Client in XP?

Where?

[TheBoy]

Virtually every webhost has std ftp open to internet, and correctly set up, is normally OK.  Granted, people in the right (priveledged) places on the net can sniff the password, hence why you should change password at least monthly.

Yes, and POP3/IMAP mail servers, and SMTP servers authenticated only by IP address etc. It works, but I consider it to be a bit of a joke and they only do it because it's cheap and they couldn't care less about their customers' data/information integrity.

All of our Internet facing servers that have been 'hit' haven't been via FTP, but due to Linux's usual problem with iptables being flakey under heavy use (have to use iptables, as proper, dedicated firewalls are too slow for some applications).


For this application - swapping files, possibly large ones - straight FTP is easy to set up and performs well

It does perform well in purely terms of getting the file from A to B efficiently, and I consider it to be ideal for public servers that allow anonymous access. But personally I'd never put anything I'm remotely concerned about becoming public onto a standard FTP server -- if it's some holiday snaps then I wouldn't worry, but if it's finance spreadsheets I would. Depends how paranoid you are really, and I guess I rank quite high on the scale when it comes to computer security

The first point. Not caring about data/integrity? No, thats not the reason. Its because people can use it.  It costs nothing to add sftp, scp etc, and these often are provided in addition to ftp (and telnet is shell access given).  The non encrypted tend to get used more due to easier use for non savvy users.

Second point. If its OK to email, its OK to ftp (in the same format) imho.