Comparison between PuTTY and F-Secure - SSH

This is a discussion on Comparison between PuTTY and F-Secure - SSH ; -----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE----- Hash: SHA1 I have used PuTTY in a number of situations that require SSH access from Windows systems, but not in a secure corporate environment. Our corporate standard is F-Secure, and not PuTTY. I was wondering ...

+ Reply to Thread
Results 1 to 3 of 3

Thread: Comparison between PuTTY and F-Secure

  1. Comparison between PuTTY and F-Secure

    -----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
    Hash: SHA1

    I have used PuTTY in a number of situations that require SSH access from
    Windows systems, but not in a secure corporate environment. Our
    corporate standard is F-Secure, and not PuTTY.

    I was wondering if there have been any security, ease-of-use, or other
    qualitative comparisons performed between PuTTY and F-Secure. How secure
    is PuTTY as compared to F-Secure? How reliable?

    Can anyone point me in the right direction?
    - --

    Lew Pitcher, IT Specialist, Corporate Technology Solutions,
    Enterprise Technology Solutions, TD Bank Financial Group

    (Opinions expressed here are my own, not my employer's)
    -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
    Version: GnuPG v1.4.2.2 (MingW32)
    Comment: Using GnuPG with Mozilla - http://enigmail.mozdev.org

    iD8DBQFEGbZsagVFX4UWr64RAlykAJ4ghfIvbZRuZto7JLGVnj emJ2j3YACg6Y+j
    fTI/rbugKw1cPUHytcHFzgM=
    =/B16
    -----END PGP SIGNATURE-----

  2. Re: Comparison between PuTTY and F-Secure

    On Thu, 16 Mar 2006 14:03:08 -0500, Lew Pitcher wrote:

    >I was wondering if there have been any security, ease-of-use, or other
    >qualitative comparisons performed between PuTTY and F-Secure. How secure
    >is PuTTY as compared to F-Secure? How reliable?


    PuTTY is free, I've been using it for years. Simon Tathan only releases
    PuTTY from his own site, for security. While the setup dialogs are a
    little clunky, the program works without fuss here on localnet as well
    as being my 'window to the world' for many years while using a remote
    account on an IRIX-64 box.

    I cannot make the comparison you ask, I have no reason to seek a different
    ssh client (ssh is built into linux terminal session) -- using PuTTY since
    last century.

    Grant.
    --
    Memory fault -- brain fried

  3. Re: Comparison between PuTTY and F-Secure

    Grant wrote:
    > On Thu, 16 Mar 2006 14:03:08 -0500, Lew Pitcher wrote:
    >
    >> I was wondering if there have been any security, ease-of-use, or other
    >> qualitative comparisons performed between PuTTY and F-Secure. How secure
    >> is PuTTY as compared to F-Secure? How reliable?

    >
    > PuTTY is free, I've been using it for years. Simon Tathan only releases
    > PuTTY from his own site, for security. While the setup dialogs are a
    > little clunky, the program works without fuss here on localnet as well
    > as being my 'window to the world' for many years while using a remote
    > account on an IRIX-64 box.
    >
    > I cannot make the comparison you ask, I have no reason to seek a different
    > ssh client (ssh is built into linux terminal session) -- using PuTTY since
    > last century.
    >
    > Grant.


    Same here. Can't make a comparison because I've never used F-secure, but
    I've been using PuTTY in a "secure corporate environment" for years.
    Frankly, I trust the open source community more than the big
    corporations. I'd be afraid they might have some back door into their
    products especially since they tend to keep the source code secret.
    --
    To reply by email remove "_nospam"

+ Reply to Thread