🚀 go-pugleaf

In article <5o47ot$hed$1@warez.psyber.com>,
Barry <barry@jasmine.psyber.com> wrote:

>My experience is that the ISPs claim that shell access is a "security
>risk".  I don't believe it is if the system is configured appropriately.

Even if the system is "configured appropriately" it is a security risk.
But that's not why ISPs don't offer shell much anymore.

>Most internet users IMHO, today, are probably lower skilled.  ie:, able
>to run Netscape and that's about it.  I'd venture to say that few
>are Unix/Linux fluent, hence, a low demand for shell access.

You are correct.  Even though all our users have shell acess almost none
of them use it.

>I prefer it because it allows me to get to my account from any
>machine on the net (unless there are firewall restrictions) and because
>I can use simple ASCII-oriented newsreaders and mailers vs. GUI based
>programs that require lots of data to be interchanged for simple 
>functions.

Lack of shell doesn't mean you can't get to your mail (or files).  An ISP
may do things that way but it's not required.