what protocol / server software for simple read-only access ?

Lone_Wolf · 2026-05-06 11:17:55

In the past days I've been testing an appimage on older distros (live image running in a qemu VM) .

the browsers that came with those live images couldn't recognize the certificate used by the filehoster and failed to download the appimage.
I setup a local ftp-server with vsftpd (took about 3 minutes) to provide the appimage to the guests.

ftp is easy to setup for readonly anonymous access and lots of filemanagers support it.
On the other hand it's also a very old protocol and support for it was removed from browsers due to security risks.

sftp is often mentioned as a successor, but that requires configuring ssh.
Using https or smb for simple readonly access feels like destroying a cheap drone with a bunkerbuster.

Is ftp still the best choice for simple readonly access ?

GerBra · 2026-05-06 11:44:08

Lone_Wolf wrote:

setup a local ftp-server with vsftpd (took about 3 minutes)

3min - That's fast. Fast setup, fast to run, profit and cake...

If you don't need a network file system often, and familar with, than keep this approach. The age lingering a protocol is not the case...
NFS is IMHO easier than Samba/AD, ssh(fs,ftp) is not a k.o. criteria on local known environments.

If nothing goes if often use nc/netcat and two dd pipes. For some files, iso, ... it's ok. Zero configuration, doesn't need root access...
//Edit: This way i often transfer my btrfs snapshots over my lan (btrfs send < nc pipes > btrfs receive)

Last edited by GerBra (2026-05-06 11:46:48)

seth · 2026-05-06 11:57:35

If "couldn't recognize the certificate" is a concern anything with an "s" becomes a none-option.

it was removed from browsers

If browsers/compatibility is a concern, http (simple https://archlinux.org/packages/extra/x86_64/lighttpd/ willl do) is your best option, notably http is predominantly "read only", but if you control clients and server there's nothing wrong w/ ftp (in a LAN!) or you could also opt for rsync.
Or for your specific purpose, what's wrong about https://wiki.archlinux.org/title/QEMU#H … _virtiofsd ?

just4arch · 2026-05-06 13:42:34

If you just need a "quick 'n dirty" solution, that works with browsers:

python -m http.server -d /path/to/folder 8080

Just make sure this isn't accessible beyond your LAN and kill it after the transfer is done.

Lone_Wolf · 2026-05-07 07:54:27

Whatever I decide on, it will only be used in the local lan limited to non-routable private ip-addresses.

browser access from guests is not necessary as long as there are tools available for the protocol used.
Majority of guests will run linux but BSDs , windows and other OSes may also occasionally be present.

I have no personal experience with nc / netcat, will look at it.

rsync seems to use ssh for remote connections which requires setup on both sides ?

virtiofs wrote:

Available in mainline since Linux 5.4, QEMU 5.0, libvirt 6.2, and Kata Containers 1.7.

linux 5.4 was released in nov 2019, so not usable on anything older then that.

seth · 2026-05-07 08:02:54

https://man.archlinux.org/man/rsync.1#rsh=COMMAND
https://man.archlinux.org/man/rsync.1#C … YNC_DAEMON

You can theoretically use telnet but the default is unencrypted rsync via :873
http is still likely to be the most compatible / least clientside hassle.

Arch Linux

#1 2026-05-06 11:17:55

what protocol / server software for simple read-only access ?

#2 2026-05-06 11:44:08

Re: what protocol / server software for simple read-only access ?

#3 2026-05-06 11:57:35

Re: what protocol / server software for simple read-only access ?

#4 2026-05-06 13:42:34

Re: what protocol / server software for simple read-only access ?

#5 2026-05-07 07:54:27

Re: what protocol / server software for simple read-only access ?

#6 2026-05-07 08:02:54

Re: what protocol / server software for simple read-only access ?

Board footer