Mike Cantrell wrote:
> 
> On Thu, 27 Jul 2000, Kevin Buettner wrote:
> 
> > On Jul 27,  1:27pm, Bill Warner wrote:
> > 
> > > we use the rsh stuff quite a lot here in our local network.
> > > it is sectioned off from the outside and a cracker could
> > > probably do us a lot of damage if they got in through our
> > > fire wall or were a disgruntled employee or some such
> > > but as for right now we are dependent on them for lots
> > > of scripts and such.
> > > 
> > > to the question.  We have a mix of SCO, HP-UX, and
> > > Linux here, mostly SCO of which we use rcmd for
> > > remote execution of commands.  This does not exist
> > > in Linux and I was wondering what the equivalent would
> > > be.  basically just execute a command remotely and have the
> > > output displayed local.
> > 
> > Is this a trick question?  You obviously know about rsh.  Why
> > won't rsh work for you?
> > 
> > Kevin
> > 
> 
> SCO doesn't have rsh the way we think of it (it uses rcmd instead). rsh in
> SCO is a restricted shell (ugh... sucks huh?). That's probably the cause
> of the confusion. 
> 
> The real answer is that you shouldn't be using rcmd's or rsh. You should
> go get openssh or secure shell and starting using ssh and scp's instead
> (since you're concerned about security).
> 
> 
We are on a mostly trusted network with little user access to the 
systems.  I
just needed a right now solution while I look into useing ssh as a 
replacement
for the rcmd rcp stuff.

one question that might be a good one.  I have only ever used ssh as a 
replacement
for telnet and never really looked into all of its functionality.  can 
it be a drop in
replacement for the r* commands?  if i crated links from rcp -> scp and 
rcmd -> ssh
will scripts still run?  and how do I go about authintication for 
replaceing the .rhosts
files?  I guess I will be rtfming on this for a while so don't bother 
answering all this
except maybe the drop in replacement stuff.

Bill Warner