The Old FTP Read-Only SchlipSchitt
 

FTP Server - OS X Finder Apple-K

The disks still mount Read Only.

My tinfoil hat consipiracy theory is that Apple do this in order to drive sales for their iDisk service.

I find it constantly infuriating.

The solutions are:

1) Use another FTP programme.

2) Set up your own webDAV server and use that to serve iDisks.

3) Something else.

I'm interested in 3.

Are there any under the hood tweaks and fiddles that would allow one to specify that a mounted FTP disk is writable? I don't mind poking about in config files or rewriting .plists, hell, I'll even recompile some of the damned OS if that will help but surely the situation is ludicrous.

Are there any official explanations for the fact that this service is broken? (I will maintain it is a cynical marketing ploy until Jobs phones me personally to explain why it isn't.)

Any solutions? Sympathy? General bitching and moaning?

Option #1 (use another FTP program) has worked well for me for the past 20-odd years.

Me too, I use Transmit. It's great. But why would Apple bother to put a half-working FTP browser in the Finder?

You see, I'm lazy. I'd love to leave an FTP share mounted on my desktop all the time and leave it syncing with my local documents folder. I could do that by writing a set of bash scripts to automate the process of logging on, syncing, logging off .. or even Applescript Transmit to do it for me with its excellent sync command but it seems to strike me as counter-intuitive. A little like buying a spelling checker when there is one built in to Core Services.

Also, I'm lazy.

As a wild guess it probably has something to do with the enormous security hole FTP opens.

So the rest of us would rather not have to deal with that because you're lazy. :rolleyes:

It's a pretty big hole coming in, and that doesn't seem to have worried Apple. The hole going out is the concern of the administrator running the service, wouldn't you say? :)

Or, to put it another way, I am (as I will maintain) extremely lazy. However, should I happen to have a server on the other side of the world to which I administer, on which I have set up a legitimate account (mine) with an enormous password constructed of a selection of alphanumeric characters, numbers and oft-unused punctuation marks which I happen to want to leave connected to my laptop while I'm banging away on my next novel - where's the security risk? edit: which, in fact, is my situation and what I am trying to do!

The only risk, and a palpable one since I succumb to it regularly, is that instead of using a swift keystroke to connect to my FTP server on my box from my laptop using my login and my password to upload the latest chapter of my novel for backup purposes, I find myself on some obscure Sun support forum wasting my time reading up on archaic builds of webDAV in an attempt to build my own iDisk server (did I mention I was cheap as well as lazy?); time that I should really be spending writing the damned novel!

This is probably just a wolf's howl in the wilderness of the internet. It's nearly a full moon, you know. I should drink some more coffee...

Actually, after a little thought whilst driving today, I affirm that this isn't a wild howl at the moon. Apple's policy is absurd. There's no talk of the security risk with the two flavours of file sharing provided by OS X, nor the massive security risk of INCOMING TELNET which is disabled by default but can be turned on with a click in the sharing panel.

If there was a careful policy of user security implemented by Apple, there should be an option to make FTP access writeable somewhere in a control panel. There isn't. It's not a security risk it's just bloody annoying and reeks of incompetence or Apple pushing their propriatary iDisk system.

I mean what's the point of including an mountable FTP system at all, if it's read only? I can do that with my web browser.

I know you're not an Apple spokesman, Craig, but doesn't the disparity between allowing incoming telnet but not allowing outgoing FTP sort of blow the whole security argument out of the water? I'd love to know why there is still not desktop FTP PUT access - it can't be a failure in the Finder development team, they know what they're doing. It must be a policy of some sort but security is not it. Occam's razor suggests they're pushing iDisk with a .mac account.

I will find a way around this that will allow me to mount an FTP share without using a third party FTP application.

It provides the ability to drag files from an ftp repository onto your hard disk. I.e. it meets the needs of file consumers, not file producers.
I vaguely recall reading something (probably on one of the developers mailing lists) to the effect that bugs prevented the release of a writeable ftp mount in Finder.

I'm sure you could do it yourself (that would be first party ?) but don't expect to find a way to get Finder to do something it isn't programmed to do.

This thread will not die. Not yet.

After a little research I have found the mount_ftp command in /sbin

mount_ftp was originally included with the OS written in Perl. Now it has been compiled in C, and therefore runs much more efficiently. It is, unfortunately, not part of Darwin and so it isn't open source, which means I can't just recompile it to connect with write access.

mount_ftp is basically responsible for the ability for OS X to mount FTP sessions as volumes and since it is both compiled and proprietory I will give up on the possibilty of Apple enabling it in the near future, or even in 10.4.

However, a little more research has unearthed LUFS, a Userland filesystem addition to the Unix kernel which basically allows unusual or exotic mounts and filesystems, including FTPFS.

This is exactly what I'm looking for.

You see how lazy I am? I am willing to go to the trouble of compiling a kernel extension just to avoid using a third party FTP program.

What it doesn't let me do, however, is compile it in Darwin, exiting with a 'Darwin not supported' configuration error.

Now, would anyone care to point me in the right direction for reconfiguring this source for Darwin? Is this question best asked in the Unix forums?

Indeed not. The Finder is programmed to conform to read/write access to the mounts the file system offers it. It's actually mount_ftp that doesn't allow the write access, but from the post above you'll see why I don't have the option of replacing or enabling it.

However, LUFS looks pretty interesting. A Darwin port would make a lot of people very happy.

I think that question would be best asked in the Developers forum since it will require programming knowledge to answer. But be aware that if Darwin is not supported, that probably means that some non-trivial changes will be needed. Thus you will need to read & understand the source and figure out what is going wrong. If you really want to pursue this, you should ask about it in the forums for that project as the developers there will be more familiar with the issues. And many of them will have OS X machines.

I'd tend to think that someone too lazy to note the differences between telnet and ssh will be unlikely to have much of a future as a kernel builder. :D

http://www.anniescostumes.com/fencing.jpg

Touché, sir. But you'll remember I did point out my laziness from the first.

I don't want to rebuild the kernel; I just want to fire someone else up enough to do it for me. ;)

Dude, if you've gotta go through all that trouble, you'll be better off just sticking with the likes of Transmit or Fetch. At least you don't have to go through all the slings and arrows of programming-or of trying to convince someone else to go through all that trouble (without having to pay them, anyway).

And since Transmit seems to have a sync command, and is AppleScriptable, then it seems to me that's problem solved, right there.

No - he wants the remote ftp repository to appear in the Finder. I.e. it's a user-interface issue.

argh...
 

I ended up here venting my frustration for the same reasons as the person who started this thread (googled my way here). LUFS configure bombed me out - darwin not supported...

If anyone's got any ideas how to mount a remote FTP server onto /Volumes or elsewhere in the filesystem where I could niftly edit files using vim in shell I would HUGELY appreciate it...! (accessing M$ box running standard M$ FTP server).

:)

I don't think you can, but what some of the FTP programs (like a few mentioned above) can do is create a copy of a remote directory as a folder on your local machine, and then synchronize the two on demand or at specified intervals.

FTP is an ancient protocol and really wasn't designed with this sort of stuff in mind. That's why there are file sharing protocols around now and not just file transfer protocols.

fair enough, although this isn't a file sharing question, but rather a remote mount issue. I don't really care about the protocol (scp,ftp,sftp etc) as long as I could mount the server onto my machine - unfortunately I only have FTP to work with. I'm loving M$.

sounds a bit long winded to go and buy a program (which I'm sure was one of the reasons behind not making FTP mounts read-only in Finder) to be able to syncronise folders via FTP.

hmm... shell script... hmm ;)

It should be noted that FTP is not a 'mounting' protocol. That's just how OS X chooses to handle it in the Finder to make life "easy" for the user. By it's very nature it will be slow.

AFP, SMB, NFS, AFS, they are all 'mounting' protocols and more of what you're looking for I think.

well I'm not an expert in these, but I would've thought that FTP is by virtue quite fast as it doesn't have the added systems overhead of those other systems that you mentioned.

I don't know how the term 'mounting protocol' came to be, but FTPFS and LUFS by on *NIX machines enables mounting remote FTP servers as part of the filesystem, although they don't come as part of mount (at least not in OSs that I've used) but separate add-ons.

but that's beside the point. I think lftp might be able to do the job when scripted... http://lftp.yar.ru/ I'll give it a go over the weekend :)

nope - false alarm. won't compile on my darwin. :(

What I'm saying is that FTP was not created for that, but the apps you've mentioned have wrangled it into that purpose.

the wrong kind of marketing
 

i have to agree with nic here. it's unbelievable that they would leave write access out of the finder for ftp volumes. definitely idisk marketing, and really quite frustrating. idisk is great, but not for everyone. some of us have a variety of web server account, or our own servers, and why should we be denied the ability to access these (full access) via the finder?

oh well, not that anyone here disagrees with me.

As I have said above, I believe it was left out due to technical problems - not for marketing reasons.

FYI: There are other ways that you can reproduce the iDisk functionality on your own server if you want. A few web sites have published instructions.

Rfc 959
 

The specification for the File Transfer Protocol, for those who are technically inclined. ;)

As with the abysmal fonts situation in Mac OSuX compared with Mac OS 9, TheWormyFruit™ has made life miserable for their bread-and-butter, viz. graphic design, desktop publishing and prepress, by making it impossible to upload files with Finder FTP to their service bureau. Apple is shooting themselves in the foot and only fostering further migration to Windoze in the publishing industry with this nonsense. Prepress trade shops and printing presses receive files on their own FTP servers, not on a frigging iDisk!

I wasn't aware that you could do ftp using the classical Finder, instead of requiring 3rd party apps like Fetch or Transmit or Interarchy.

Is there documentation on how to do that somewhere?

I did not intend to imply that the Mac OS 9 Finder could do FTP; I was only trying to say that in a large number of respects, Apple has forsaken its desktop publishing niche by the retrogression of usability, functionality and dumbed-down or outright removed features in the transition to Mac OSuX. The *new* feature of Finder FTP in Mac OSuX - without upload capability - is an insolent slap in the face to the publishing industry.

So, you are implying that the people in the publishing industry lack the wherewithal to go download a 3rd party application exactly like they would have had to do in the past?

I submit anyone who can figure out how to use Photoshop and XPress is a little sharper tack than that. At least I'd like to hope so.


edit - By the way, if this thread degenerates into an offtopic rant fest it'll be closed.

No, of course people can go download and pay for an FTP utility that is less convenient than the Finder's built-in FTP. But the point is that the Finder's FTP is much nicer, easier and user-friendly than anything else ... except that Apple artificially crippled it and disabled upload for no good reason.

As for rants, Apple has made things so much more user-hostile that there's no avoiding it at every turn. I've been in prepress for ten years and I'm fed up; it didn't have to be this way! All we ever wanted was a Mac OS 9-type experience with preemptive multitasking and memory protection, not the degraded workflow we suffer now.

Macs used to enjoy a GISTICS-measured advantage over Windoze in return on investment of some $24,000 per year per seat. Mac OSuX still is better than Windoze, but the gap has narrowed markedly, and it's costing us!


"... We've seen Apple try to sell cost of ownership ... and it doesn't work."
— Steve Jobs, 2002 Apple annual shareholder's meeting


"... I have occasional phone calls to Steve Jobs; sometimes, we'll get together for lunch. He might ask me a few questions about what do I think about that, how are we doing here. I let him know what I really want or I'll list bugs in a new product.

"But it's funny because, sometimes, I'll report something that's serious -- just not working -- like [a new drive] just doesn't work with Apple's new PowerBooks. And, sometimes, I get told: 'Oh, you're wrong. No, everything works.' And sometimes I'll get the top manager at Apple: 'Oh, yeah, they work fine.' They work fine if you've got some special set-up program, but not what Apple ships.

"A whole bunch of other people find the same problem, eventually. So it's real, but I get told it's not. ..."
— Steve Wozniak

OK, this started off as a (potentially interesting) thread on having write-accessible FTP volumes. I see it has morphed from there, and now borders on becoming an OS X rant. OS X rants are fine; they should be in their own thread, however, so as to not pollute this one.

A few notes to make the continued discussion here useful and not a flamefest (against OS X, moderators, contributors, or anyone else):

1) There is no evidence that Apple has intentionally disabled FTP write access in the Finder to see iDisk subscriptions. There are enough free and nearly-free solutions out there that do work in the Finder that this assumption is borderline ludicrous. If Apple really wanted to do this, they would block all mounting of other writable servers in the Finder (SMB, WebDAV) other than the iDisk; they don't do this, you can use any SMB or WebDAV server you wish. You just can't mount an FTP server as a writeable server.

2) If Apple really was pushing iDisk by limiting the Finder's FTP services, don't you think they'd at least mention iDisk in their technote on that very subject??? Yes, I would too ... but they don't! Not nary a mention of iDisk as an alternative.

3) Getting the Finder itself to mount an FTP volume will be nigh impossible, unless someone can find a way to write a very hacky low-level Finder extension that traps all commands targeted at the FTP server -- and I'm not even sure that's possible. Since the Finder is closed source, it won't be possible to modify its code to pull this off.

4) Given (3), the best solution available at this time if you need FTP write support is a third-party application, a number of which have been mentioned.

5) The really, truly, best solution is to enable WebDAV on the remote server, and then just use the Finder to connect to the WebDAV share, as you'll have full write access. Or use SMB, which also allows for write-mounted volumes in the Finder. Both of those methods provide the full integration you desire, without any third-party apps.

In short, the Finder doesn't presently support writable FTP volumes, and only Apple can really change that. For now, use WebDAV, SMB, or a third-party program.

And everyone, please try to keep things civil. Remember we're all OS X users here; we're all on the same side of the big debate! :)

-rob.

I'd be very interesting in hearing why your workflow is now degraded compared to what you used to have in OS 9. Please start another thread with this as the topic as it doesn't belong in this thread. Tell us, with specific examples if possible, how you used to do things in OS 9 and why that way is no longer possible in OS X.

To get it back on track, as griffman suggested:

kludges like ftpfs, LUFS, ... are just that, kludges.
However, it would be nice if the Finder just talked to any fs Darwin can mount.

I suppose the thread-starter has good reason to want to use ftp.

Until there is a working solution, the easiest way around it could be an editor such as BBEdit with integrated (s)ftp-capability.

But you as an author probably have even stronger feelings about your editor than about file-transfer protocols :) .

The already mentioned option to sync a folder every now and then should also solve the problem at hand.

You might as well wish to look into offers from freemailers (gmx.net comes to my mind, but there are lots of others) who will give you WebDAV access (1 GB for gmx) you can readily mount and enjoy...

Then again, WebDAV via Finder is dog-slow, chances are, that code in the Finder is ugly and inefficient and I wouldn't hold my breath that this is going to change anytime soon now.

So if, in spite of your admitted laziness, you are really looking for a solution that will work here and now and you are root on that server of yours, your best bet would be to set up a vpn tunnel to that machine and then run AppleShare over it.

netatalk has improved a lot with version 2, it would give you the warm, fuzzy user experience you long for.

Get a Linux/unix machine and automount the FTP site. Then re-share the mapped directory over SMB or NFS and connect using the Finder to that.

Done. Ok so it's not strictly speaking FTP in the Finder, but it's still an FTP site in the Finder...

(oh, but you'll need to buy a linux/unix machine or a nice friend with one)

:P

That's an extremely nifty and up-to-spec idea.

You might even want to install netatalk on the Unix-machine and mount the ftp-server as a standard AppleShare Volume !

question
 

why does the ftp server allow me to write to the directory from a windows machine?

i know i am late on this, but it makes no sense.

i am going to get fetch, but i thought it might be odd to some that if you put ftp://username@ftp.dns.com/ in IE on a XP PC, it connects without problem. You might have to specify for it to open it in a new window, or to open it from my net places, but it works.

i am a mac guy, but i hae to use pcs for web stuff and i noticed this annoying thing a while back.

weird, huh?

jhaack1@hotmail.com:o

Windows is known for many high-security features such as this. ;)

It's pretty apparent why Finder-mounted FTP won't happen
 

After reading the man page for mount_ftp and mount_dav, I realized WHY Apple won't implement write access to FTP for the Finder.

It hit me when I read the part in the WebDAV mounter about Apple only supporting read/write with DAV servers that support DAV LOCK. AHA! I've been wanting to do transfers... edit locally, transfer to remote. However, the Finder would enable all sorts of things, like (foolish perhaps, but possible) the opening of an iMovie project from an FTP server. Without the ability to lock a remote file, it's open for read/write conflicts in a Very Big Way(tm).

The only way to avoid the problem is to do something like lock files, which are notoriously for getting out of sync and locking files that shouldn't be locked... among other things. It's a scary thought. :)

I'd rather use Transmit (which is Good Software(tm)) with its sync capabilities and a Folder Action to create a drop folder for drag-n-drop uploading. That's all I really want anyway.

Laterz!

Well, it's all a moot point now: With these, Finder FTP mounts now can be read-write; and SSH volume mounts are possible, too!

http://code.google.com/p/macfuse/

http://www.sccs.swarthmore.edu/users.../MacFusionWeb/

I've got it running, and it's sweet! Flawless! It even has some multithreading built in that avoids the spinning beachball of death in the Finder while it's busy doing its networking thing, unlike TheWormyFruit's™ pathetic read-only Finder FTP mount, which often locks one out for minutes at a time. Once again, some open source teenagers have put to shame the shittiest app in the Mac universe: Apple's own Finder!