>>>> You can thank Windows for this.
>>>
>>> Nah. You can thank NAT for this.
>>
>> I think it's more the general problem of Internet security.
>
> No, it's a problem of routing. If you can't address the remote computer,
> you can't give it a file, no matter what protocol you use.
>
>>> Note how all of those require a running server on a public IP address.
>>
>> Well, yes. To perform a data transfer, you need a way to contact the
>> other end.
>
> That's my point. It's nothing to do with Windows vs Linux. It has to do
> with public vs private IP addresses.

Certainly it's nothing to do with what OS you're running.

I still think the main problem is that to allow somebody to send you 
data, you have to figure out how to prevent anybody *else* sending you data.

>> I'm told there's a system called UPnP or something which is supposed to
>> allow you to automatically bypass NAT.
>
> The local machine still needs to run something that uses upnp to poke a
> hole in the firewall.

Sure. I'm saying that if you were expecting someone to get/put a file, 
the software that makes this happen could temporarily open a suitable 
port, and then close it when it's done.

That way, you could (for example) have an IM client that doesn't send 
data through a 3rd party.

>> It's news to me that you can transfer files with RDP.
>
> Give it a try. Log in remotely, copy a file off your desktop, mouse over
> the remote machine, and pick paste.

How the heck w...?

Oh, wait, you can set the remote display to not take up the whole 
screen, can't you?

-- 
http://blog.orphi.me.uk/
http://www.zazzle.com/MathematicalOrchid*

Post a reply to this message