Take the 2-minute tour ×
Super User is a question and answer site for computer enthusiasts and power users. It's 100% free, no registration required.

I've heard it from some sources that SFTP is preferable to FTPS. If this is the case, I'm wondering why exactly.

share|improve this question

migrated from stackoverflow.com Oct 24 '09 at 7:00

This question came from our site for professional and enthusiast programmers.

    
A question like this is better suited for Serverfault. –  David Pearce Oct 24 '09 at 7:32
2  
"How cool would it be to see a question get ping ponged SF->SO->SU->MSO->SF->SU->SF->SU->SF->MSO->Closed – Lucas McCoy" –  David Pearce Oct 24 '09 at 7:34
    
@joshhunt A question did make the homerun, but not one has made a whirlwind. –  random Oct 24 '09 at 7:44

4 Answers 4

I prefer SFTP over FTPS mainly because it takes extra effort to set up an FTP server on a server. Most probably the server is going to already have SSH installed to administer it remotely, so why not just take advantage of what is already installed? Using SFTP requires no extra effort to get it running.

Most FTP clients have built in support for SFTP, so client support is mainly a moot point.

share|improve this answer

This page from CodeGuru has a good summary of the pros and cons of each:

As usual, the answer depends on what your goals and requirements are. In general, SFTP is technologically superior to FTPS. Of course, it's a good idea to implement support for both protocols, but they are different in concepts, in supported commands, and in many other things.

It's a good idea to use FTPS when you have a server that needs to be accessed from personal devices (smartphones, PDAs, and the like) or from some specific operating systems that have FTP support but don't have SSH/SFTP clients. If you are building a custom security solution, SFTP is probably the better option.

As for the client side, the requirements are defined by the server(s) that you plan to connect to. When connecting to Internet servers, SFTP is more popular because it's supported by Linux and UNIX servers by default.

For private host-to-host transfer, you can use both SFTP and FTPS. For FTPS, you would need to search for a free FTPS client and server software or purchase a license for commercial one. For SFTP support, you can install an OpenSSH package that provides free client and server software.

share|improve this answer

SFTP has no problems with port mappings, and thus no issues with NAT router/firewalls. (And, many home DSL and cable modems are in fact NAT routers, and attaching a standalone wireless access point might even introduce "double NAT".)

In FTP, and hence in FTPS, multiple connections are needed. Client and server agree on the IP address and ports to be used within the so-called "application level" communications. But, a NAT router or firewall (which would rather only care about "transport level" issues) needs to know about these details, and hence needs to inspect the actual data. This raises many issues, which are non-existent for SFTP.

share|improve this answer

I dont think that one is preferable over the other. It really depends on your infrastructure. This thread from CodeGuru discusses the pros and cons of SFTP and FTPS.

One benefit of FTPS is the data channel. The data channel can be redirected to transfer files from server to server. This feature is not well understood. Thats why alot of people would say that the FTP data channel is unnecessary.

I believe that if you're just interested in sending files securely, then you should go with FTPS. If you already have an SSH infrastructure, then SFTP might be useful.

share|improve this answer

Your Answer

 
discard

By posting your answer, you agree to the privacy policy and terms of service.

Not the answer you're looking for? Browse other questions tagged or ask your own question.