[ale] Still using plain FTP? Why?

[Raj Wurttemberg]

My biggest battle lately is transferring many (4,000+) large (100+GB) files and needing to do parallel transfers to fully utilize the (internal) pipe. At the moment, we are transferring the data from a 3TB HD (USB3) over 1G ethernet.  I'm using rsync to copy the files. Security or encryption is not needed (the files are actually encrypted) because all of the file transfers are on the internal LAN (there is no Internet access).

/Raj


> -----Original Message-----
> From: ale-bounces at ale.org [mailto:ale-bounces at ale.org] On Behalf Of
> Michael B. Trausch
> Sent: Tuesday, January 20, 2015 4:50 AM
> To: ale at ale.org
> Subject: Re: [ale] Still using plain FTP? Why?
> 
> Respectfully, I couldn't possibly disagree with you more.
> 
> Let me start with a few statements:
> 
>   * Anyone with the time and money to do so can obtain an AS number, an
>     IPv4 and/or an IPv6 network block, and two BGP connections between
>     other ASes at e.g., an IXP, and obtain transit traffic which is ripe
>     for the picking.
> 
>   * Simply using FTP gives away at least four potentially useful pieces
>     of information: (a) you are looking for or transferring one or more
>     files; (b) the names of the files you list, transmit, or receive
>     (which people generally fail to protect with the same fervor as the
>     file's contents); (c) certain metadata of certain files which are
>     listed or transferred (e.g., timestamps, permission bits, usernames
>     and/or groups); and (d) the contents of the file, whether in
>     plaintext or ciphertext.