[HN Gopher] BebboSSH: SSH2 implementation for Amiga systems (680...
___________________________________________________________________
BebboSSH: SSH2 implementation for Amiga systems (68000, GPLv3)
Author : snvzz
Score : 55 points
Date : 2025-11-26 01:51 UTC (21 hours ago)
(HTM) web link (franke.ms)
(TXT) w3m dump (franke.ms)
| yjftsjthsd-h wrote:
| > Short: BebboSSH - SSH2 suite (client/server, sftp) with modern
| ciphers
|
| Sweet.
|
| > It will work on an unaccelerated Amiga but establishing the
| connection takes about one minute.
|
| Is latency good once the connection is established? Speed tests
| in the kB/s seem promising, but for interactive use that seems
| like the determining factor.
|
| Also, slightly meta: What is this web ... app(?)? Looks like a
| git frontend?
| jeroenhd wrote:
| At 40kbps I don't think the latency can be great. Having done
| SSH over 64kbps when I overran my mobile data subscription, my
| experience is that modern SSH clients expect more than that to
| run smoothly.
|
| > Also, slightly meta: What is this web ... app(?)? Looks like
| a git frontend?
|
| Looking at the source, this seems like a custom-built git
| frontend, served by a bespoke web server called BEJY (by the
| same author) it seems.
| gspr wrote:
| > At 40kbps I don't think the latency can be great. Having
| done SSH over 64kbps when I overran my mobile data
| subscription, my experience is that modern SSH clients expect
| more than that to run smoothly.
|
| What do these bandwidth numbers have to do with latency?
| kimixa wrote:
| If the round trip time is dominated by the time taken to
| encrypt and decrypt packets locally, as seems here, then
| the speed at which it can complete that is _absolutely_
| important for measuring "latency".
| gspr wrote:
| Sure. But if it can decrypt at 40 kbps, then this won't
| be the bottleneck.
| jeroenhd wrote:
| Even with good latency, most of my connection was taken up
| by TCP retransmissions at that bandwidth because of an
| over-eager (standard) SSH client. I can't imagine the TCP
| stack on an Amiga doing much better in the same scenario.
|
| Not exactly the same scenario of course, but I'd expect
| you'd need a custom SSH client willing to wait with small
| enough packets to keep the latency acceptable.
| gspr wrote:
| Interesting! Thanks. I had no idea the standard SSH
| client was so eager.
| startaq wrote:
| > Also, slightly meta: What is this web ... app(?)? Looks like
| a git frontend?
|
| Seems to be a custom git frontend written by him:
| https://franke.ms/git/bebbo/tigler
| rhubarbtse wrote:
| I gave it a go (A1200+AmiTCP 4.3), doesn't seem to work
| unfortunately and I can't seem to find any issue tracker on the
| website.
|
| 3.RAM Disk:bebbossh> bebbossh user@10.0.0.1
|
| [2025.11.26-09:10:01.280] [INFO ] can't open
| `envarc:.ssh/ssh_config`
|
| [2025.11.26-09:10:01.640] [ERROR] can't read 4 uint8_t header,
| got 0
|
| [2025.11.26-09:10:01.647] [ERROR] can't read
| SSH_MSG_KEX_ECDH_REPLY
|
| ERROR: 16 - tcp read failed
| actionfromafar wrote:
| Well, what's in _envarc:.ssh /ssh_config_ ? :-)
| indigo945 wrote:
| The program seems to call gethostbyname() on the supplied host,
| so you may want to try providing a DNS name instead.
|
| Also, call with -v8 to get more detailed logging.
| rhubarbtse wrote:
| Hostname is not the issue, it can connect and then fails some
| handshake or whatever. Adding verbosity just seems to hexdump
| the packets in addition to logging an error.
|
| [2025.11.26-09:10:21.460] [FINE ] got server
| SSH_MSG_KEX_ECDH_INIT
|
| sending: length = 48
|
| 0000 00 00 00 2C 06 1E 00 00 00 20 D0 91 2C 8F 57 AF
| ...,..... ..,.W.
|
| 0010 91 B2 F9 C5 77 42 30 D1 2E A5 A0 B2 C6 C8 76 4C
| ....wB0.......vL
|
| 0020 5F 32 27 E7 1F 0D A2 32 C0 3A 00 00 00 00 00 00
| _2'....2.:......
|
| [2025.11.26-09:10:21.520] [FINE ] sent server
| SSH_MSG_KEX_ECDH_INIT
|
| [2025.11.26-09:10:21.533] [ERROR] can't read 4 uint8_t
| header, got 0
|
| [2025.11.26-09:10:21.540] [ERROR] can't read
| SSH_MSG_KEX_ECDH_REPLY
|
| [2025.11.26-09:10:21.554] [FINE ] bye bye
|
| ERROR: 16 - tcp read failed
| richrichardsson wrote:
| I wonder why the name change? Threats from rights holders?
| snvzz wrote:
| I wouldn't be surprised if this was the case, given the long
| history[0].
|
| 0. https://sites.google.com/site/amigadocuments/
| eisbaw wrote:
| https://github.com/eisbaw/nano_ssh_server
| jrmg wrote:
| "World's smallest self-contained SSH server. Entirely AI slop"
|
| :-|
___________________________________________________________________
(page generated 2025-11-26 23:01 UTC)