Deprecating base system ftpd?

[Cy Schubert]

In message <CAOtMX2jjL0Kgmv2WsGQhEBm46pNPn-Ni=UfSi=1MDW=-asgbpQ at mail.gmail.c
om>
, Alan Somers writes:
> --000000000000bb4fba05bf3ae99f
> Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8"
>
> On Mon, Apr 5, 2021 at 8:45 AM Cy Schubert <Cy.Schubert at cschubert.com>
> wrote:
>
> > In message
> > <CAPyFy2AbP2X339zbemZ9Y8edjNKdyygnR9mH48Q78nxwDtOBAg at mail.gmail.c
> > om>
> > , Ed Maste writes:
> > > I propose deprecating the ftpd currently included in the base system
> > > before FreeBSD 14, and opened review D26447
> > > (https://reviews.freebsd.org/D26447) to add a notice to the man page.
> > > I had originally planned to try to do this before 13.0, but it dropped
> > > off my list. FTP is not nearly as relevant now as it once was, and it
> > > had a security vulnerability that secteam had to address.
> >
> > I think this is an excellent start. My shopping list includes:
> >
> > - remove ftp(1)
> > - remove ftpd(8)
> > - remove telnet(1)
> > - remove telnetd(8)
> > - remove ftp:// and http:// from libfetch. This is 2021 and we should all
> > use https://.
> >
>
> Whoa there!  You can't remove ftp and http from libfetch, because FreeBSD
> doesn't control all of the servers that our users need to fetch from.  Not
> even close.
>
>
> > - replace DNS lookups with DoH and/or DoT. Why let your ISP see your DNS
> > traffic?
> >
> > >
> > > I'm happy to make a port for it if anyone needs it. Comments?
> >
> > I've started working on splitting ftp and ftpd into an external git repo.
> > The problem I've encountered is that though only ftp and ftpd are left the
> > resultant repo is still 1.2 GB. If my last attempt fails, there is a
> > choice
> > between a 1.2 GB repo and burning ftp forever then the choice is clear:
> > burn it forever.
> >
> > Adding the following as an option:
> >
> > Also note that the tnftp ports are the NetBSD ftp and ftpd. The FreeBSD
> > ftp
> > and ftpd are simply copies of tnftp and tnfpd. Would it make more sense to
> > share our customizations with NetBSD and we simply reply on NetBSD for the
> > client and server in our ports? This last option might be simpler than
> > creating a port.
> >
>
> Maybe, but that would be an impediment to adding Capsicum support.

If they accept #ifdef'd Capsicum patches, great! Otherwise we'd need to 
support a port for a period of time.

>
>
> >
> > Personally, I'd suggest we remove the ftpd server *AND* ftp client and
> > rely
> > on ports. Having worked on UNIX, Internet security, and firewalls over the
> > last 3/5 of my almost 50 year career, I have lamented the existence of the
> > FTP protocol back in 1995 and I hate the FTP protocol with greater a
> > passion today. Let's simply remove all vestiges of FTP from the base
> > system, including libfetch, sooner than later. We don't need it now that
> > we
> > have HTTPS and POST; and sftp.
> >
> > I think we should make it our goal to remove any and all unencrypted
> > protocols from FreeBSD by 2025.
> >
>
> tftpd is still vitally important for PXE booting.  And unencrypted NFS will
> certainly live on past 2025.

Sadly yes but I'm of the opinion we should do as much as we can with the 
low hanging fruit.

I doubt there will be a replacement or enhancement for tftp. Until the IETF 
NFSv4 TLS draft has been widely accepted and implemented across all 
platforms we will need to live with unencrypted NFS for a while. I'm hopful.


-- 
Cheers,
Cy Schubert <Cy.Schubert at cschubert.com>
FreeBSD UNIX:  <cy at FreeBSD.org>   Web:  https://FreeBSD.org
NTP:           <cy at nwtime.org>    Web:  https://nwtime.org

	The need of the many outweighs the greed of the few.