Ultra VNC born (again)?

[Jack Beglinger]

> I might quickly add that, the filetranfer component in particular is very
> welcome, as most windows platforms (unlike *nix) do not have a ftp server
> installed by default, and adding one, although possible, is another added
> pain, especially if you want to send a 5k configuration script or
> something...  And using VNC's existing data connection, means less hassles
> with firewalls etc...  If VNC works, so will VNC with file transfer!!!  I
> hope a *nixVNC server implements this, so the *nix vnc users see what they
> are missing!! :-)

I hope they do not add a new back door into the unix systems as Ultra is 
adding to its windows client.  By adding this function, you made it so 
network admins will be forced to protect their systems by not allowing *ANY* 
traffic of VNC.  It is hard enough to get them to agree to allow desktop 
access but to include a new vector to attack to steal information though...

If Ultra installed (or RealVNC) installed with a option to load a mini-FTP 
server, then issue is lowered.  Because is using a known vector - firewalling 
will work.  Also for windows users FTP client has been available in the 
browsers. Lastly, if a company is support VPN/SSH tunnels - then two 
traffics travel the same pipe.  

So why rebuild the wheel?  And possible close VNC ports for an added 
function that already exists?

jackb