PuTTY 0.69 has been released | Hacker News Reader

PuTTY 0.69 has been released

chiark.greenend.org.uk

43 pointstgragnato18 comments

Here are the changes from the changelog, looks like it's just bug fixes:

* Security fix: the Windows PuTTY binaries should no longer be vulnerable to hijacking by specially named DLLs in the same directory, even the names we missed when we thought we'd fixed this in 0.68. See vuln-indirect-dll-hijack-2.

* Windows PuTTY should work with MIT Kerberos again, after our DLL hijacking defences broke it.

* Jump lists should now appear again on the PuTTY shortcut in the Windows Start Menu.

* You can now explicitly configure SSH terminal mode settings not to be sent to the server, if your server objects to them.

Anyone else use the Bitvise SSH Client[0]? I have used it in place of PuTTY for a long time (I don't recall how I found out about it originally) as it seems much more feature-rich but PuTTY is still dominant on Windows, from what I have seen.

[0] https://www.bitvise.com/ssh-client

>>[...] but PuTTY is still dominant on Windows, from what I have seen.

I think that's because the Bitvise SSH client wasn't freely available until last year[1], whereas PuTTY has been freely available since the dot-com days[2]. Absolutely nothing wrong with this, but the 15+ year lead as a freely available client is probably the main contributing factor for PuTTY's dominance on Windows. Habits are hard to change sometimes.

[1] https://www.bitvise.com/ssh-client-version-history-6

[2] http://www.chiark.greenend.org.uk/~sgtatham/putty/changes.ht...

At this point, I'm looking for things that support ed25519. I'm a fan of SecureCRT ($) and have been for years.

On a related note, it's surprisingly hard to find a Windows SFTP server that supports modern ciphers when I looked recently.

I haven't tried it. I just use SSH on Cygwin nowadays... Will probably just use SSH directly on ubuntu if I get windows 10 some day.

I used Bitvise in a commercial context. Both server and client. Always seemed excellent.

About 18 years of development and only at version 0.69, I love it. Almost no commercial software company would number their software so.

I love open-source software's simple websites, dorky logos, and straightforward --- even self-deprecating --- self-descriptions. And I'm someone whose background is in graphic design, communication, etc.

It's just a refreshing contrast to the bloat and bluster of corporate projects. I would trust most open-source projects' version 0.69 over most commercial software's version 6.9.

BLAH. I was really hoping for SSH CA support. I want that on windows now already. Yes OpenSSH (with CA support) can run on windows 10 under the linux subsystem, but it won't yet support X11 forwarding, and PuTTY does. I need X11 support and CA support, and I haven't found anything under windows that does that.

I have never understood why the SSH client that is considered standard on Windows must be a GUI program. Even though it's Windows, this just rubs me the wrong way. Somehow, even running xterm using Xming feels more natural. (The Cygwin ssh is, of course, a command-line executable, as it should.)

You can now run OpenSSH in a console window via Windows Subsystem for Linux, if that makes you feel more at home.

https://msdn.microsoft.com/en-us/commandline/wsl/install_gui...

Because cmd.exe sucked until at least Windows 10.

Technically, you mean conhost.exe, not cmd.exe, but yes. cmd.exe is analogous to /bin/sh, not xterm.

Even if it had a lot of features chances are they wouldn't have been compatible with the terminal 'standard' expected by the servers.

I've been using Bash on Ubuntu on Windows for the last 10 months instead of PuTTY. Pretty satisfied, it make operation on only linux easier.

In a few years when the windows linux subsystem has more traction I expect putty will become mainly unnecessary.

Agree. But it was a program that is far ahead of its time. Thank you Putty devs.

I stopped using windows in 1991

Windows is a disease

Reply on news.ycombinator.com