Password protection for ALL access?

[HaLo]

Please tell me that an upcoming version of the software will include password protection which covers even the most basic access to the PVS.

If someone finds the SnapStream http server during a port scan (and on @Home people scan pretty regularly) right now they can hop on, find the PVS interface, check my status, and start watching shows. Bad. And if I do notice someone watching, I can't remotely tell who and kick/ban them. Bad. Heck, there doesn't even seem to be a way to do it locally.

I understand that SnapStream is in its relative infancy but security features like password access should not have been missed. Any votes for an admin view with Kick/Ban by watcher IP while we're at it?

I'll probably hit my 2G limit by the time I get home from work, and I'd really like to use the padding feature, but I won't be paying for the product until it offers the most basic of security features.

[Russ Spooner]

I agree some form of security is pretty essential. but honestly, who would do a thing like that...

BTW what is your IP address...

:-))


Originally posted by HaLo:
Please tell me that an upcoming version of the software will include password protection which covers even the most basic access to the PVS.

If someone finds the SnapStream http server during a port scan (and on @Home people scan pretty regularly) right now they can hop on, find the PVS interface, check my status, and start watching shows. Bad. And if I do notice someone watching, I can't remotely tell who and kick/ban them. Bad. Heck, there doesn't even seem to be a way to do it locally.

I understand that SnapStream is in its relative infancy but security features like password access should not have been missed. Any votes for an admin view with Kick/Ban by watcher IP while we're at it?

I'll probably hit my 2G limit by the time I get home from work, and I'd really like to use the padding feature, but I won't be paying for the product until it offers the most basic of security features.

[HaLo]

Originally posted by Russ Spooner:
I agree some form of security is pretty essential. but honestly, who would do a thing like that...

BTW what is your IP address...

:-))



http:// http://discuss.snapstream.com/ubb/smile.gif. http://discuss.snapstream.com/ubb/smile.gif. http://discuss.snapstream.com/ubb/smile.gif. http://discuss.snapstream.com/ubb/smile.gif

Not that I'd give my IP, but I'm sure you could find plenty of snapstream servers on the @home network besides mine. http://discuss.snapstream.com/ubb/smile.gif

SnapStream is REALLY cool, and is really making my co-workers here at the office quite jealous. Two of them who recently upgraded their PCs into multimedia god boxes are now about to run out and buy tuner cards so that they can try it out. http://discuss.snapstream.com/ubb/smile.gif

However, there are a few basic features - like access security - which need a lot of work before I'll be comfortable opening up my server for remote access.


[This message has been edited by HaLo (edited 03-12-2001).]

[rkuo]

HaLo,

I'll see what we can do about implementing basic authentication before you can even access the server. There are a lot of things on our plate at the moment though =).

[HaLo]

Hey, no problem.

As a user, I see stuff that I figure should be in there, and I get noisy about it. As a developer, though, I understand what it takes to actually work through a pile of requests like this one. http://discuss.snapstream.com/ubb/smile.gif

I'm sticking with SnapStream. You seem to be heading in a direction that I like, and even with the gaps I'd like to see filled in SnapStream has quickly become an invaluable tool for keeping up with television programs in a time-effective manner.