From: "Glenn Meadows" 

I'd take a look at SurgeFTP from NetWin.  I'm evaluating it right now, as
we're going to open a site for outside designers to send in finished art
files.  Will be behind a firewall in a DMZ, next to our mail server.
Nothing critical on it other than the art files, NO anon access, for sure.
Also, separate upload and download areas from the public side, so files
uploaded can't be retrieved from anywhere other than an internal access.

--
Glenn M.


"Mike N."  wrote in message
news:reame0hc2a3niinjcppmfhl4sd8np4lgln{at}4ax.com...
> On Tue, 06 Jul 2004 17:38:13 -0400, Richard B. 
wrote:
>
> >Youse guys got a preference for an FTP server?
>
>    I'd begrudgingly say "MS FTP" on the windows platform.  
You can enable
> disk quotas to limit account space.    Here's some old data-
>
>  I've seen a system with weird NT 4.0 FTP activity on an unauthenticated
> FTP connection (with anonymous logins disabled).   After seeing that
> system, I switched to WFTPD (Texas Software).  This was OK until there was
> a recent exploit that took him several weeks to get a patch out.   That
> made me doubt that he has a large enough user base to count on his full
> support in the future.
>
> There's Ipswitch WS_FTP server.   This is fine except that in about April
> someone published about 5 full system level exploits.   It took them about
> 6 to 10 weeks to rewrite the security and release the next version
upgrade.
>
>   So that leaves MS FTP server which I don't remember as having any recent
> exploits.
>

--- BBBS/NT v4.01 Flag-5