Talk:Comparison of SSH clients

Inclusion criteria
Based on what criteria certain products get to be included in this comparison or others not?

Going through discussions below, I see that "notability" is one of the criteria. Could you explain what makes one product more notable than other? — Preceding unsigned comment added by Mstd83 (talk • contribs) 17:03, 8 October 2019 (UTC)


 * "Notability" here is equivalent to "has its own page" which has enough third-party sources to meet WP:GNG or WP:NSOFT. See Write the article first for details. Anton.bersh (talk) 13:20, 28 April 2021 (UTC)

Connectbot?
I note that in the Platform table there is a column for the Android OS, but no mention of Connectbot which seems to be the most common/popular android ssh client. connectbot : Secure shell (SSH) client for the Android platform is (I hope) a link to the developers site which lists some of the features and of couse users can install it from the Android Market. It is already mentioned in List_of_Open_Source_Android_Applications.

Would anyone mind if I added Connectbot to the tables?

Jon Peatfield (talk) 13:53, 8 September 2010 (UTC)

No-one has objcted yet, so I don't know if I should take that as permission to add connectbot to the table...

Jon Peatfield (talk) 22:14, 4 May 2011 (UTC)

Well I decided to be bold, I hope no-one minds.

Jon Peatfield (talk) 23:41, 4 May 2011 (UTC)


 * It used to be there. It had been removed under WP:WTAF.  As one of the few SSH clients on android (and probably the most popular), it warrants a stub & you might start one.  It has received some coverage in multiple books.  Red links will probably get purged from this page (and my impression is that the others are less notable). --Karnesky (talk) 19:10, 5 May 2011 (UTC)


 * As of 2021, ConnectBot already exists but still does not have enough sources to clear WP:GNG or WP:NSOFT. Let's wait for this article to improve. Anton.bersh (talk) 13:24, 28 April 2021 (UTC)

MindTerm
Mindterm has been removed from this topic of comparison of ssh clients. I would simply like to re-add the product back into the this topic so that the data is accurate with a valid long standing commercial SSH product. I am not a developer or a WIKIPEDIA expert so if someone can share what must be done to re-insert Mindterm, it will be very helpful. Does anyone object or see any issues in adding Mindterm back in to the comparison?

Note: Mindterm is shown in previous versions of this page. Thank you Reggie Horne (talk) 12:36, 4 April 2013 (UTC)

Mindterm has been removed from this topic of comparison of ssh clients. I would simply like to re-add the product back into the this topic so that the data is accurate with a valid long standing commercial SSH product. I am not a developer or a WIKIPEDIA expert so if someone can share what must be done to re-insert Mindterm, it will be very helpful. Does anyone object or see any issues in adding Mindterm back in to the comparison? Note: Mindterm is shown in previous versions of this page. Thank you Reggie Horne (talk) 12:36, 4 April 2013 (UTC)

I wonder if it would be possible to add the software MindTerm to this list?

It is a ssh terminal client which is free for personal use, it runs on all systems that have Java, and apart from this it does great scp and sftp file transfer.

http://www.appgate.com/index/products/mindterm/mindterm_download.html

--78.34.98.148 (talk) 14:41, 2 September 2010 (UTC)

SSH Secure Shell
This client used to be listed, but was removed?!! I use it almost every day because of the FTP GUI. The ROTW should be able to know about this too. (I don't know how to edit pages yet, so I'm not going to add this to the actual page). March 2008 Lehasa (talk) 00:58, 13 March 2008 (UTC)
 * Note that SSH Secure Shell (v.3.2.9) is free and is the only SSH client that supports FTP.
 * SSH Secure Shell v.3.2.9 is no longer available for download from SSH. Also, FTP support is irrelevant. --76.173.203.32 (talk) 18:57, 23 August 2009 (UTC)
 * Other clients also support ftp (SecureCRT/SecureFX bundle for example), but that is not relevant. What IS relevant is that SSH Secure Shell is an SSH client. Being "downloadable" is not a criterion for inclusion here, as far as I can tell. Am I missing something? Stian (talk) 20:41, 14 September 2010 (UTC)
 * The criteria for inclusion is not that it exists, but that it is notable. You do seem to be missing the fact that "SSH Tectia" is already on the list (as the current version of what had been SSH Secure Shell from what had then been SSH Communications Security). --Karnesky (talk) 23:01, 14 September 2010 (UTC)

Source model
When I saw "source model" in the edit summary, I was thinking "threads"/"forking"/"single process", etc (like Apache talks about the various "models" in HTTP Server 2.x). If there must be such a column, it might better be called "source availablility" or something similar, although it seems to me to be redundant with the "license" column. Maybe an "open source" column, with Yes and No values, à la comparison of web browsers, would be better? —Fleminra 10:31, 3 February 2006 (UTC)
 * "Source model" is the usual term used for this. It is almost redundant, except for Putty which is listed "freeware". Freeware does not imply open source. NicM 10:56, 3 February 2006 (UTC).
 * It seems to me that in "open source model", "open source" is a compound modifier of "model" (some would hyphenate "open-source" to be clear). Searching for "source model" seems to always find it preceded by an adjective ("open"), participle ("closed"), or noun "community" compounding with "source".  One instance where "source model" is clearly atomic is here, where "source model" is used to mean "gcc's internal model of the source code".  Maybe what we're really talking about is "license for use of object code" and "license for use of source code". Regards, —Fleminra 19:31, 3 February 2006 (UTC)
 * If you have "open source model," "closed source model," "shared source model," etc, it isn't too improbable to refer to them as "source models." Technically correct or not, it is, I think, what most people will instinctively do, fairly accurate (they are all models of how access to source is arranged, right? source models) and IMO clear (I've seen or heard it before when talking about this stuff but the only place I can find it now on its own is Template:Infobox OS :-), I think you're right that is usually seen with open/closed prepended). It isn't the same as license, no license automatically requires the source to be open or closed by default, licensing is about distribution and modification. Even the GPL doesn't require source to be made available until binaries are distributed. License is already listed anyway. However, on looking at it, using the term "open source" is probably a poor idea since it is a licensing/political term as well as a description, so perhaps it may be better to change the column to "Source available: yes/no," which is more neutral and closer to what (I at least) intended the column to mark. NicM 20:07, 3 February 2006 (UTC).
 * Sounds good to me. The community should try to form some official guidance on these Category:Software comparison articles because the same issue is going to come up with every one.  I recently started comparisons for web servers and DNS servers, and fleshed out this article, and I pretty much blindly copied what Comparison of web browsers did. —Fleminra 21:05, 3 February 2006 (UTC)

VPN
I just annotated the "Technical" table to clarify what I meant when I originally added the "VPN" column: the ability for the SSH client to establish a VPN. In particular, I did not mean that it could work over an existing VPN (which wouldn't be a feature of a network software application, per se). In other words, OpenSSH (for instance) can create a local virtual network device (TUN/TAP), and alter one's local routing table such that all other local network software applications can transparently access resources on the remote network (sans socksification).

Naturally, having added the column doesn't mean I own it or anything… its purpose is subject to deliberation. In any case, a quick scan didn't find anything to confirm that SecureCRT can do this, which is why I'm bringing this up. Is it true? —Fleminra 10:31, 3 February 2006 (UTC)
 * No, that was an error. I added an X11 forwarding column too but then removed it and must have mixed up the SecureCRT entry. NicM 10:56, 3 February 2006 (UTC).
 * so re-add it,because it is important

The VPN functionality seems to be unavailable on Windows (OpenSSH via cygwin, non-self-compiled), even if a tap device is installed via other means. Would somebody more experienced than I like to check this and add a footnote to the Yes for OpenSSH? 88.217.99.159 (talk) 18:32, 21 February 2014 (UTC)

included
Is there perhaps a option next to the yes and no? I ask because OpenSSH is included in Mac OS X, Cygwin, the BSDs and most Linuxes, so perhaps that could be an option for listing in the platforms listing. Janizary 21:42, 3 February 2006 (UTC)


 * Since inc is for incomplete, I put up included. It's the blue one for Cygwin and BSD right now, opinions? Janizary 22:26, 3 February 2006 (UTC)

"Active" column
Maybe "[date of] most recent release" would be more objective. —Fleminra 20:19, 4 February 2006 (UTC)

I added a "Latest Release" column. The "Active" column should probably be audited to confirm these projects are still active. —Meznak (talk) 16:10, 28 October 2011 (UTC)

Big notice
I've the removed the big comment about having Wikipedia articles. If we followed it, we would have only three entries. There aren't that many SSH clients out there, we can stand to have red links, so long as at least part of the table is filled in. Maybe restore it once all the current clients have articles, assuming they are all even notable enough. NicM 09:48, 5 February 2006 (UTC).
 * I agree completely (naturally, since I added many of the links in question). If it becomes forbidden for articles to mention things that don't yet have articles, then Special:Wanted pages becomes pointless.  At a given instant, the threshold of notability in the context of Wikipedia may be higher than the threshold of notability for people searching for a SSH client (the absence of a "pssh" article has not detracted from pssh's usefulness to me).  —Fleminra 10:54, 5 February 2006 (UTC)


 * I actually find it to be a good thing, because it isn't a rule, more an advisory that makes the people adding clients take into account how this isn't just a place to list everything under the sun, and may encourage people to actually put up articles for these clients that they find notable. Janizary 20:40, 5 February 2006 (UTC)
 * Perhaps a note along the lines of "Please consider the notability of the client before listing here," although that does kind of imply there is some notability requirement. If we want to come up with one, I strongly think it should be applied to the existing entries too. NicM 22:48, 5 February 2006 (UTC).


 * This page contains a link to a missing article for AbsoluteTelnet. To resolved this, I created an article for AbsoluteTelnet, but it was deleted as spam.  I've recreated it, but it is again flagged for deletion because it is not 'notable'.  Can I not just replace the link here to the 'AbsoluteTelnet' article with a link to my website?  --Bpence 17:43, 2 August 2007 (UTC)

telnet
Why is telnet listed on an ssh comparison anyways? Should we then also include rlogin support as a box, it's just as relevent to the subject. I really think it should be dropped. Janizary 21:04, 5 February 2006 (UTC)
 * It's a comparison of ssh clients. Some do telnet as well, I think this is probably worth pointing out. Changing it to telnet/rlogin would be good, if any of the clients do rlogin. NicM 22:38, 5 February 2006 (UTC).


 * Well, SecureCRT does. If we are going to add listings of random other protocols, they should probably be as seperate columns, not merged ones though.  Janizary 00:49, 6 February 2006 (UTC)
 * It isn't a random other protocol, it is a significant, still often used protocol that performs a similar function and that a number of SSH clients support; I am not suggesting adding an HTTP column and listing "No" all the way down. It is probable to say that those looking for an SSH client will be interested to know that some of the possible choices can do telnet as well. If enough clients do several other protocols, an "Other protocols" column may be best, but most only do SSH and a few telnet. A note about rlogin for SecureCRT may be a good idea, or adjusting the column title to "Telnet/rlogin" is probably appropriate for rlogin's significance (it is very rarely used, unlike telnet). NicM 08:31, 6 February 2006 (UTC).


 * While some people do still use telnet, I'd hardly call it significant to ssh users. I don't use putty myself, so I don't know how well it works, but putty also supports rlogin.  Janizary 04:22, 7 February 2006 (UTC)
 * Some people use both telnet and SSH and an integrated client is a useful thing. I'd expect Comparison of Telnet clients to mention that Putty can handle SSH too, so why wouldn't the reverse be true here? Change the column to "telnet/rlogin" or to "Other protocols," if you like, either is fine by me. NicM 09:48, 7 February 2006 (UTC).

Clients
The name of the SSH Communcations client changed in 2004 to "SSH Tectia Client" (see http://www.ssh.com/products/tectia/client/), it also has a GUI for the MS Windows version. Should the entry simply be updated or is there value in creating a new entry for the new name to retain the history of the old name (which was actually "SSH Secure Shell" not "ssh")? HughNo 13:15, 6 March 2006 (UTC)
 * I say just fix the existing entry, this article is only a summary, it doesn't need historical detail. Perhaps consider mentioning the name change in ssh (or create SSH Tectia Client). NicM 13:41, 6 March 2006 (UTC).

dropbear
http://matt.ucc.asn.au/dropbear/dropbear.html for embedded environements there are port for zaurus and similar(http://www.jbmm.fr/index.php?ind=downloads&op=entry_view&iden=112)

Tags
I've removed the tag since I don't really think this article should just be deleted. What is inappropriate about the tone and is there anything in particular requiring verification? NicM 16:26, 7 March 2006 (UTC).


 * The tone is that of a list rather than an encyclopedia article. The entire article needs references per WP:CITE; at the very least some of the platform compatibility entries are misleading. &mdash;donhalcon╤ 17:11, 7 March 2006 (UTC)
 * This encyclopedia has a number of lists and this article matches the tone of them. If you think lists in general are unencylopedic you probably need to make that point in a more general forum (or bring this one up for AfD) since I don't think this complaint is really fixable—unless you have any specific suggestions about how it could be done?
 * Which entries do you find misleading, and how? NicM 17:35, 7 March 2006 (UTC).
 * I don't think that all lists are unencyclopedic; however, a great many of the lists on Wikipedia are. There are a few lists which contain reasonable content (for example, comparison of unicode encodings goes into detail about important considerations for an encoding, giving the table some content that at least approaches what you'd expect in an encyclopedia).
 * The entries I find misleading are, in particular, the ssh row, the Mac OS column, the SFTP/SCP column, and the almost completely empty entry for "ssh plugin". &mdash;donhalcon╤ 18:13, 7 March 2006 (UTC)
 * Yeah, could probably lose the ssh plugin. How are the Mac OS and SFTP/SCP misleading? NicM 18:17, 7 March 2006 (UTC).
 * Well, "Mac OS" includes both OS 9 and OS X; a casual reader could easily skip over the first and notice the second, leading to confusion. SFTP/SCP are a bit misleading because, for some of the packages (like PuTTy), these clients are a separate download and a separate executable. &mdash;donhalcon╤ 18:25, 7 March 2006 (UTC)
 * Well, they are both easily fixed. NicM 18:30, 7 March 2006 (UTC).
 * The article links to secure shell in the first sentence, I think it is expected that that article provides the context for the table. NicM 18:19, 7 March 2006 (UTC).
 * If this article is considered to be a part of the secure shell article, why not add to make that explicit? &mdash;donhalcon╤ 18:25, 7 March 2006 (UTC)
 * It isn't considered to be part of it, it is a list of something that the secure shell article explains. isn't a terrible idea though. Perhaps  instead. NicM 18:30, 7 March 2006 (UTC).
 * The addition of the details tag seems appropriate, and removes my concerns about tone because it clearly attaches this article to that, which provides encyclopedic content. I'm still quite concerned by the row simply labelled "ssh", though &mdash; on most distributions "ssh" is OpenSSH, I think.; regardless, the ssh wikilink doesn't do anything to make explicit a particular implementation.  &mdash;donhalcon╤ 18:55, 7 March 2006 (UTC)


 * Yes, WP:NOT has anti-list restrictions. It doesn't have anti-comparison restrictions.  I think comparisons are good ways to make lists encyclopedic.  The tone is fine.  Furthermore, WP:CITE doesn't make references mandatory. --Karnesky 18:46, 7 March 2006 (UTC)
 * Calling a list a "comparison" doesn't magically make it encyclopedic. A list by any other name is still a list; and WP:CITE suggests removing unreferenced content if it is disputed.  &mdash;donhalcon╤ 18:55, 7 March 2006 (UTC)
 * Read WP:NOT and WP:LIST. Structured lists are fine. This is MORE than just a structured list (it contains more information).  You dispute specific uncite material, not the article as a whole. why not use the citation needed template where you think it is appropriate?--Karnesky 18:57, 7 March 2006 (UTC)
 * I have withdrawn the "not verified" tag. On further reading, the rest of the links on the page provide sufficient context; though the developer's websites don't technically meet WP:CITE, I suppose they're good enough.  &mdash;donhalcon╤ 19:20, 7 March 2006 (UTC)

Features
It would be nice to have a feature comparison chart. Which products have tab support, macros, transparency, whatever.&mdash;pcraven╤ 11 May 2006 (UTC)


 * some features...look in the man page of openssh
 * openssh suport hardware cryptography devices at least under openBSD
 * openssh support smard cards...

Some Lists don't have all the clients
Ok, the "General" List has 15 clients. The "Platform" List only has 13. The "Technical" List only has 9. I think that either a client is listed in all three, or it should not be listed at all. Tcmstr134 (talk) 20:10, 31 May 2008 (UTC)

Red links and external links
I see that we have a lot of red and external links here. I don't think that we should be comparing non-notable software in an encyclopaedia and anything that is notable should have an article. I am inclined to do a purge. Is everybody OK with this? If there are no objections I will do it in a few days time. In the meantime, it would be a good idea to fix any links that are only red by mistake, to avoid them getting purged. --DanielRigal (talk) 23:29, 19 December 2008 (UTC)


 * I have a problem with this. You purged my product 'AbsoluteTelnet'.  It has more things in the 'yes' category than any of the other clients, so I'm not sure why you purged it.  I've since added it back.
 * --Bpence (talk) 12:42, 26 January 2009 (UTC)

The "features" section lists features that IMO are not very noteworthy. If I were more cynical, I'd suggest that it only existed to portray AbsoluteTelnet in a good light... —Preceding unsigned comment added by 114.72.101.187 (talk) 08:47, 29 January 2009 (UTC)


 * I am the author of AbsoluteTelnet/SSH, and I'd have to say that exactly the opposite is true. I don't add things to the features table to make AbsoluteTelnet/SSH look good.  I add features to AbsoluteTelnet/SSH to make AbsoluteTelnet/SSH a good product.  I've watched this page for years and when a feature appears in one of the tables, I fill in whether Absolute supports the feature or not.  If AbsoluteTelnet does *not* support a feature, I treat it as a feature request and give serious consideration to adding it in the next version.  If you look at the history of the page, you'll see I have never added a column to any of the tables.  I do, however, add features to AbsoluteTelnet/SSH regularly, which is probably why AbsoluteTelnet supports so many of the features listed here.


 * For example, if you go back in the history of this page, you can see that the first entry for the 'features' table was for OpenSSH and the only features listed were 'smartcard support' and 'hardware encryption'. I have since added smartcard support to AbsoluteTelnet/ssh, but when evaluating whether to add hardware encryption, it became apparent that this was more of a server feature, so this checkbox will likely remain dark for Absolute.  It makes sense for a server, because the server can offload the encryption burden of hundreds or thousands of simultaneous connections to a hardware device.  It makes less sense for a few connections originating from a single client, especially when the cost of the hardware encryption devices is pretty large and client CPU speeds can already handle the task.


 * One could argue what the difference is between 'technical' and 'features'. Why are they in different tables?
 * --Bpence (talk) 03:01, 30 January 2009 (UTC)


 * Please note that there is a serious conflict of interests here. You should not be writing about your own product, far less reverting its removal. Wikipedia is not a software directory and these list articles are only meant to list and compare notable software. If a product does not have an article then it is generally not notable. This is not a comment on the quality of the software. This is just how encyclopaedia's work. --DanielRigal (talk) 12:48, 13 March 2009 (UTC)


 * Daniel, AbsoluteTelnet has been on this list for years. Is it a conflict of interest to maintain the accuracy of the features listed in this article?  Why would you just arbitrarily remove it?  —Preceding unsigned comment added by Bpence (talk • contribs) 20:27, 15 March 2009 (UTC)


 * No, but it was a COI to revert its removal. The removal was not arbitrary. I removed all entries which had no Wikipedia article, not just yours. Wikipedia is not a business directory or a software directory. We don't list all software. The article on AbsoluteTelnet got deleted three times. Deleting it here is just bringing this article into line with that decision. --DanielRigal (talk) 20:34, 15 March 2009 (UTC)
 * In the deletion discussion, the argument was that the information in the AbsoluteTelnet article really belonged in "Comparison of SSH clients". To remove it from "Comparison of SSH clients"  because it lacks an article of its own seems to be circular reasoning.  TeraTerm, for example, has a "notability" warning, but is still included in this list.  —Preceding unsigned comment added by Bpence (talk • contribs) 21:15, 15 March 2009 (UTC)


 * BTW, I don't want to come of as argumentative here. I want AbsoluteTelnet to be listed, but I want it to be listed the right way.  What confuses me is what criteria are being used to allow some software articles but delete others. --Brian Pence (talk) 21:21, 15 March 2009 (UTC)


 * TeraTerm is tagged as being of questionable notability but nobody has actually deleted it. Maybe it should be. I will have a closer look at it. I am also having a look at the AfD discussion you mention. I am well aware that many articles that get deleted are not the very worst that we have but WP:WAX warns against defending articles by saying "but it is no worse that xxx". --DanielRigal (talk) 21:26, 15 March 2009 (UTC)


 * OK. I have looked at TeraTerm. It has one independent reference, which is not really sufficient, but I have decided to put an additional tag on it and see if it improves. If not, I will probably send it to AfD in week or two. As for the AfD on AbsoluteTelnet, the important thing is to note that the result was "delete" not "merge". One person did muse about the relationship between lists, red links and article creation but I don't think he was suggesting that non-notable software should be on the lists, only that its presence as a red link on the lists did not, in itself, justify creating an article.
 * Anyway, I think I can suggest something. What I have done is added a link to the SSH clients section of the Open Directory Project. This can list as many SSH clients as it likes without any notability restriction. AbsoluteTelnet is already listed there (under Windows) so at least you will be linked (indirectly) from Wikipedia. --DanielRigal (talk) 21:46, 15 March 2009 (UTC)


 * Another thing... I know you shouldn't defend an article by comparing it to other articles, but this *was* the primary argument given for it's deletion. In the deletion discussion, the argument was that a search for  'absolutetelnet ssh viewtopic'  gave only 74 results while the same search for putty yielded over 20,000 hits.  Is it really fair to compare AbsoluteTelnet to the most popular open source ssh client out there?  Using that standard for the remaining clients in Wikipedia, here are the google results (below) .  While AbsoluteTelnet does not have the most links, there are others whose notability might come into question if this is the measure that is used.  AbsoluteTelnet is square in the middle.

sunssh         33,900 winscp         18,300 putty          12,900 curl            7,830 openssh         5,870 absolutetelnet  3,490 dropbear        3,180 teraterm        2,240 lsh               512 penguinet         365 sftpplus            5

--Brian Pence (talk) 22:22, 15 March 2009 (UTC)

unindent) If you really think the AfD was flawed then you can contest it by wp:deletion review. Alternatively, if you feel that AbsoluteTelnet has increased its notability since it was last deleted then you can request it as a new article. I very strongly advise you not to make it yourself due to the COI issues. Go to WP:Requested articles and list it there. Somebody else will make an article although this may take some time. --DanielRigal (talk) 22:56, 15 March 2009 (UTC)
 * perhaps it is time for deletion review, then. The link to ODP is fine, but lacks the feature by feature comparison that this page provides.  Would you be interested in authoring a new article?  I could provide you with the technical details. --Brian Pence (talk) 22:00, 16 March 2009 (UTC)
 * That's the problem. If it would require your help to write the article then it indicates a probable lack of notability. If we can't write an article from published, reliable, mostly secondary sources then we probably shouldn't be doing so at all. --DanielRigal (talk) 22:23, 16 March 2009 (UTC)


 * I was only offering. You could write it without my help.  I guess I'm just used to people coming to me for information about my program.  —Preceding unsigned comment added by Bpence (talk • contribs) 02:48, 17 March 2009 (UTC)

Filezilla
Does Filezilla belong on this list? I'm not sure that it has SSH functionality. Tisane (talk) 11:46, 9 March 2010 (UTC)

No I dont think Filezilla has ssh functionality. Feraudyh (talk) 18:42, 15 February 2011 (UTC)


 * SFTP? 194.249.198.32 (talk) 07:22, 23 July 2011 (UTC)

FileZilla supports SFTP protocol that allows encryption of data being transferred. Even though SFTP was originally intended for use with SSH, it is possible to use the SFTP protocol over any other channels. Just having a SFTP protocol support does not make FileZilla a SSH client! What SFTP does in FileZilla is the transfer of encrypted data over unsecured channel. FileZilla has nothing to do with SSH and should be taken off this list. 99.140.190.117 (talk) 18:17, 11 December 2011 (UTC)

Using SFTP without SSH is possible but rarely be done, as it is completely insecure (unauthenticated and unencrypted). Almost all SFTP clients (including FileZilla) use SSH, because supporting the stand alone SFTP without SSH is pointless. Low power (talk) 04:50, 30 March 2021 (UTC)

Indeed, there are hardly any SFTP clients that are not technically SSH clients at the same time. Maybe the problem is that most people imagine "SSH terminal client" under "SSH client". Technically it's not the same. Maybe this article needs rename. --Prikryl (talk) 06:22, 30 March 2021 (UTC)

Note re: possible COI
I'm posting this note regarding my recent addition of dataComet-Secure to this comparison and the possible perception that a conflict of interest may exist here, since I develop and distribute the software, and there seems to be some controversy on the Talk page about whether it's appropriate for a developer to add or maintain entries to this list (e.g., AbsoluteTelnet, which BTW I recognize myself as a notable Windows application, one which definitely belongs on this list... but personally I don't believe ANY particular terminal application is "notable" in the sense which Wikipedia requires for adding a page dedicated to it :->).

Note first that I've never attempted to add an article on dataComet or dataComet-Secure.

The article is prefaced with the statement that it lists "popular" SSH applications, rather than "notable" applications, which would indicate to the average user that it's (relatively) comprehensive, rather than being restricted to Wikipedia-notable clients.

All feature listings etc. for dataComet-Secure are labelled correctly, and no modifications were made to listings for other applications.

thanks, bonze

bonze blayk 16:20, 13 June 2010 (UTC) —Preceding unsigned comment added by Bonzesaunders (talk • contribs)

Cleanup
Todo: --Karnesky (talk) 17:09, 13 July 2010 (UTC)
 * Remove or stub red links
 * Complete tables
 * Add filezilla and Sun SSH to last three
 * Add essh client to last two
 * Add dropbear, lsh, and ssh tectia to last one
 * Clean external links

This was tagged as containing "original research or unverifiable claims" and as having no references. Because the article clearly has some references, I've removed the latter tag. I'd propose removing the original research tag (there are multiple sources that contain much of the information in the tables & much of it is referenced in the individual articles that are the subject of the comparison), but want to give the tagger the chance to note which claims he cannot verify so that useful references could be given. --Karnesky (talk) 21:06, 27 July 2010 (UTC)

Kermit
Kermit can also SSH, both in the proprietary Kermit-95 for Windows version and in the freeware C-Kermit for other systems version.

Perhaps someone could take information from the Kermit pages to add it to the appropriate tables. -- pne (talk) 10:57, 7 October 2010 (UTC)


 * This is a comparison of Secure Shell Protocol software, Kermit is about a different protocol entirely. (Just making sure all article concerns are addressed, even if a decade later.) Anton.bersh (talk) 13:15, 28 April 2021 (UTC)

Tunnelier SSH
I noticed that Tunelier is not mentioned which is in my opnion at least the most graphically rich SSH client there is for Windows: http://download.cnet.com/Tunnelier/3000-7240_4-10061771.html — Preceding unsigned comment added by 24.132.122.106 (talk) 07:15, 7 June 2011 (UTC)

The best thing about Bitvise Tunnelier is when you run it, there is both a GUI SCP screen and a console terminal. You have both worlds at your fingertips. There is als both a client and server version available. Ed Burg, 16 January 2013

This client does not have its own article, so it probably should not be in these tables yet. See Write the article first. Anton.bersh (talk) 13:31, 28 April 2021 (UTC)

Should Anzio be added?
Anzio is another SSH client that appears missing from the list. www.anzio.com — Preceding unsigned comment added by Timbo151 (talk • contribs) 20:58, 26 August 2011 (UTC)

RDRAND support
It's immaterial now, as no clients or publicly-available hardware now supports it, but support for the  instruction will be a benefit to security. The PuTTY folks are considering it, and I'm sure most clients will, in time. Once Ivy Bridge is out, we should begin charting it. 65.166.89.2 (talk) 14:42, 26 September 2011 (UTC)

Advertising masquerading as content
Adding multiple additional columns to the Feature Comparison Table, filling them in with yes for your own product and then stuffing the fields for all other clients with question marks (where you simply haven't bothered to do any research) distorts the comparison and smells strongly of advertising masquerading as content. Recently, 24 additional columns were added to the feature compaorison table, which served only to highlight one commerical SSH Client above all others. Many of the columns headers were barely distinguishable and others should have been minor footnotes, or perhaps should have warranted a separate table.

I have removed these, not least because they made the table completely impractical to read on most computer monitors, but also because there was strong commercial bias in favour of a particular product. When adding a new column to a features table, please think first whether you're adding information, or just noise.


 * - Why not create another table for those new features if the existing table was too wide? Question marks where there to show people that information about a particular feature was missing. Instead of deliberately deleting everything, why not just format/modify information - to improve the page and its contents? Listed items were, after all, revevant items in the SSH Client space. Captainjackfromgermany (talk) 21:19, 23 January 2012 (UTC)

Cyberduck?
Why can't cyberduck be listed? I use it on a Mac and it's free and it doesn't ask you to know programming languages... direct visual GUI is a plus, seriously.


 * Cyberduck is not an SSH client, it is an FTP client, so it is on Comparison of FTP client software. Anton.bersh (talk) 13:10, 28 April 2021 (UTC)

puttywincrypt
PuttyWincrypt : http://code.google.com/p/puttywincrypt/

I think it have his place in this comparison ?

PuTTYwincrypt is a patched version of PuTTY. PuTTYwincrypt enables the user to use any private key related to a certificate in the user personal certificate store to perform public key ssh authentication.

As long as there exists a certificate in the user personal certificate store that has a corresponding private key it should be possible to use the key to perform a public key ssh authentication.

This enables the use of smart cards in PuTTY and Pageant, as long as the smart card is supported by Windows. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 81.252.128.61 (talk) 12:20, 31 May 2012 (UTC)


 * There is no Wikipedia topic for PuttWincrypt; notability is not established. Take a look at WP:WTAF TEDickey (talk) 09:56, 7 June 2012 (UTC)

LittleOrange
I removed references to LittleOrange Multi SSH Client due to a lack of evidence that the program exists. User:Wprimadi is likely the account of the alleged author. — Preceding unsigned comment added by CACLF (talk • contribs) 19:14, 4 January 2013 (UTC)

Poderosa
I've been using Poderosa for SSH access for years.

http://en.poderosa.org/

http://sourceforge.net/projects/poderosa/ — Preceding unsigned comment added by 204.238.252.23 (talk) 20:17, 27 June 2013 (UTC)

kitty
Add the kitty client to this article. --Johnny Bin (talk) 15:26, 9 March 2017 (UTC)

External links modified
Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified one external link on Comparison of SSH clients. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:
 * Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20150621211145/http://www.unixmantra.com/2013/04/putty-connection-manager-tabbed-putty.html to http://www.unixmantra.com/2013/04/putty-connection-manager-tabbed-putty.html/

When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.

Cheers.— InternetArchiveBot  (Report bug) 16:37, 11 August 2017 (UTC)

JuiceSSH
Is JuiceSSH on Android noteworthy enough for inclusion? If so, can someone add it? Thanks. 199.168.151.86 (talk) 12:32, 16 July 2018 (UTC)


 * JuiceSSH does not have its own page, so it probably should not be in these tables yet. See Write the article first. Anton.bersh (talk) 13:05, 28 April 2021 (UTC)

WinSCP is not actually SSH client
WinSCP is a file transfer software which operates on top of SSH, but is not meant to perform raw SSH actions like actually executing commands and displaying outputs. Does it actually belong here? Anton.bersh (talk) 13:03, 28 April 2021 (UTC)

MobaXterm
Does someone have time to add MobaXterm? --Faulenzius Seltenda (talk) 09:22, 22 August 2021 (UTC)

Request to clarify table data for wolfSSH
Tim-Weller-wolfSSL (talk) 18:40, 15 December 2022 (UTC)
 * Specific text to be added or removed:
 * Update Platform table, wolfSSH row, z/OS and AIX column entries, to clarify NO support
 * Update Technical table, wolfSSH row, Proxy client column entry, to clarify NO support
 * Update Features table, wolfSSH row, Auto-reconnect column entry, to clarify NO support — Preceding unsigned comment added by Tim-Weller-wolfSSL (talk • contribs) 18:55, 15 December 2022 (UTC)
 * Update Authentication key algorithms table, wolfSSH row, all EdDSA and Security keys column entries, to clarify NO support
 * Reason for the change:
 * The existing entries for wolfSSH in several of the tables have unknown (?) status. This request is to clarify these entries to have an accurate representation of the state of the wolfSSH product.
 * References supporting change:
 * https://www.wolfssl.com/products/wolfssh/
 * Pictogram voting keep.svg Go ahead: I have reviewed these proposed changes and suggest that you go ahead and make the proposed changes to the page. PK650 (talk) 23:56, 7 January 2023 (UTC)
 * I have made the edits proposed in the request. Thank-you for your time and attention! Tim-Weller-wolfSSL (talk) 21:22, 16 January 2023 (UTC)