FTPd and Redhat 7.1 ISO

[Chris Wong]

On Tue, 17 Apr 2001, Ray Strode wrote:

> > I have to agree that HTTP would be the better choice and
> > limit access in your Apache config or via firewall.
> > AnonFTP is just too risky.

> I whole-heartedly disagree.  FTP is for file transfer and just because
> wu-ftp is a bad apple doesn't mean the whole orchard is, _especially_
> since we are talking about anonymous ftp.  FTP can resume and stuff
> too.

FTP has it's own set of flaws, in particular the requirements for a
privledged port 20 data channel which requires the daemon runs as root
after creating a connection.

Yes there's passive FTP, but we're discussing the protocol as a whole.
Active FTP has flaws. And you can resume http connects in HTTP 1.1 IIRC.
I'm not entirely too sure on that.