Mailing List Archive: Questions About RealVNC Personal Edition...

Questions About RealVNC Personal Edition...

Dec 10, 2009, 3:01 PM

Post #1 of 6 (5819 views)

Hello:

For over a year, I've been using RealVNC (free version) through an SSH
tunnel to administer my Dad's Windows XP computer from several hundred
miles away. Recently, his older machine went south and a new one was
purchased for him. I have it mostly restored to the previous setup, but
ran into a problem with the SSH program I'd been using... and may want to
abandon it.

I'm wondering if the RealVNC Personal Edition would be a better solution
for me, and I have a few questions...

Is it as secure as the VNC over SSH tunnel method in all respects?

Can the VNC service be run on a non-standard port (if desired) using the
'native' (XP SP3) Windows Firewall?

Would it be possible to run Personal Edition 'side by side' with the free
version (on the same target machine) to provide a backup method?

I'm still on a dialup connection (with no hope of getting broadband
anytime soon) and the VNC/SSH combination I'd been using, while slow, was
'survivable'... and a good bit faster than the web access service I had
as backup.

With the added encryption overhead, will the Personal Edition of RealVNC
likely be noticeably slower than the free version?

Any/all replies welcome and appreciated.

Thanks.

Peter B.

-----

_______________________________________________
VNC-List mailing list
VNC-List@realvnc.com
To remove yourself from the list visit:
http://www.realvnc.com/mailman/listinfo/vnc-list

Re: Questions About RealVNC Personal Edition... [ In reply to ]

stella at rider

Dec 14, 2009, 10:54 AM

Post #2 of 6 (5573 views)

Permalink

Is the new computer on Windows XP? If so, you should be able to keep on
using it as before. There's no reason you would need to switch to the
paid version.

If the new computer is running Vista or 7, then the free edition won't
help you. However, you might want to consider other free alternatives,
not only because they would work on the newer OSes, but also, many have
video drivers that help out considerably when running thru slow links.
(UltraVNC or TightVNC).

As far as SSH clients, best option is PuTTy...

Peter Bunn wrote:
> Hello:
>
> For over a year, I've been using RealVNC (free version) through an SSH
> tunnel to administer my Dad's Windows XP computer from several hundred
> miles away. Recently, his older machine went south and a new one was
> purchased for him. I have it mostly restored to the previous setup, but
> ran into a problem with the SSH program I'd been using... and may want to
> abandon it.
>
> I'm wondering if the RealVNC Personal Edition would be a better solution
> for me, and I have a few questions...
>
> Is it as secure as the VNC over SSH tunnel method in all respects?
>
> Can the VNC service be run on a non-standard port (if desired) using the
> 'native' (XP SP3) Windows Firewall?
>
> Would it be possible to run Personal Edition 'side by side' with the free
> version (on the same target machine) to provide a backup method?
>
> I'm still on a dialup connection (with no hope of getting broadband
> anytime soon) and the VNC/SSH combination I'd been using, while slow, was
> 'survivable'... and a good bit faster than the web access service I had
> as backup.
>
> With the added encryption overhead, will the Personal Edition of RealVNC
> likely be noticeably slower than the free version?
>
> Any/all replies welcome and appreciated.
>
> Thanks.
>
> Peter B.
>
> -----
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> VNC-List mailing list
> VNC-List@realvnc.com
> To remove yourself from the list visit:
> http://www.realvnc.com/mailman/listinfo/vnc-list
>

_______________________________________________
VNC-List mailing list
VNC-List@realvnc.com
To remove yourself from the list visit:
http://www.realvnc.com/mailman/listinfo/vnc-list

Re: Questions About RealVNC Personal Edition... [ In reply to ]

robin at robinhill

Dec 15, 2009, 8:23 AM

Post #3 of 6 (5547 views)

Permalink

On Thu Dec 10, 2009 at 05:01:44PM -0600, Peter Bunn wrote:

> I'm wondering if the RealVNC Personal Edition would be a better solution
> for me, and I have a few questions...
>
> Is it as secure as the VNC over SSH tunnel method in all respects?
>
That depends really on what encryption they're using - this doesn't seem
to be documented anywhere though. I doubt it'll have quite the same
level of rigorous testing as openssh has been through though (unless
they're using openssl under the hood anyway). That's unlikely to make
any difference for this sort of usage though.

> Can the VNC service be run on a non-standard port (if desired) using the
> 'native' (XP SP3) Windows Firewall?
>
> Would it be possible to run Personal Edition 'side by side' with the free
> version (on the same target machine) to provide a backup method?
>
You'd be best addressing these to the RealVNC support/sales emails. I
don't see why you shouldn't be able to run it on a non-standard port
though. Running it side-by-side is likely to be problematic though.

> I'm still on a dialup connection (with no hope of getting broadband
> anytime soon) and the VNC/SSH combination I'd been using, while slow, was
> 'survivable'... and a good bit faster than the web access service I had
> as backup.
>
> With the added encryption overhead, will the Personal Edition of RealVNC
> likely be noticeably slower than the free version?
>
Shouldn't be - you're trading the ssh encryption overhead for the
RealVNC encryption overhead.

The alternative is to stick with ssh - you should be able to run openssh
server with cygwin, or freeSSHd (www.freesshd.com) is a more
user-friendly server.

Cheers,
Robin
--
___
( ' } | Robin Hill <robin@robinhill.me.uk> |
/ / ) | Little Jim says .... |
// !! | "He fallen in de water !!" |

_______________________________________________
VNC-List mailing list
VNC-List@realvnc.com
To remove yourself from the list visit:
http://www.realvnc.com/mailman/listinfo/vnc-list

Re: Questions About RealVNC Personal Edition... [ In reply to ]

alexp at broadcom

Dec 16, 2009, 8:05 AM

Post #4 of 6 (5554 views)

Permalink

I have been using Enterprise Edition for several years and very happy
with it. I have not used encryption but other than that it is an
excellent product. Although I am still at 4.2.9 version since none of
the new features interest me.

You can answer most of your questions by downloading a trial version of
software and testing it.
As far as overhead goes, vnc is using some sort of a block cipher (aes
or blowfish, I think) which does not create overhead or creates very
little overhead. So using encryption your speed should be the same.

One advantage of paid vnc over a free one is mirror driver. Over fast
links desktop feels almost like local. On unix though free version is
completely adequate.

You can try tight vnc which also has mirror driver and should have
somewhat better encoding over slow links.

Also you could try remote desktop which comes with windows and is pretty
good.

Alex

On 12/10/2009 3:01 PM, Peter Bunn wrote:
>
> Hello:
>
> For over a year, I've been using RealVNC (free version) through an SSH
> tunnel to administer my Dad's Windows XP computer from several hundred
> miles away. Recently, his older machine went south and a new one was
> purchased for him. I have it mostly restored to the previous setup, but
> ran into a problem with the SSH program I'd been using... and may want to
> abandon it.
>
> I'm wondering if the RealVNC Personal Edition would be a better solution
> for me, and I have a few questions...
>
> Is it as secure as the VNC over SSH tunnel method in all respects?
>
> Can the VNC service be run on a non-standard port (if desired) using the
> 'native' (XP SP3) Windows Firewall?
>
> Would it be possible to run Personal Edition 'side by side' with the free
> version (on the same target machine) to provide a backup method?
>
> I'm still on a dialup connection (with no hope of getting broadband
> anytime soon) and the VNC/SSH combination I'd been using, while slow, was
> 'survivable'... and a good bit faster than the web access service I had
> as backup.
>
> With the added encryption overhead, will the Personal Edition of RealVNC
> likely be noticeably slower than the free version?
>
> Any/all replies welcome and appreciated.
>
> Thanks.
>
> Peter B.
>
> -----
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> VNC-List mailing list
> VNC-List@realvnc.com
> To remove yourself from the list visit:
> http://www.realvnc.com/mailman/listinfo/vnc-list
>

_______________________________________________
VNC-List mailing list
VNC-List@realvnc.com
To remove yourself from the list visit:
http://www.realvnc.com/mailman/listinfo/vnc-list

Re: Questions About RealVNC Personal Edition... [ In reply to ]

eshelmand at gmail

Dec 16, 2009, 11:30 AM

Post #5 of 6 (5563 views)

Permalink

The short answer is NO
On Dec 15, 2009, at 08:23 AM, Robin Hill wrote:

> On Thu Dec 10, 2009 at 05:01:44PM -0600, Peter Bunn wrote:
>
>> I'm wondering if the RealVNC Personal Edition would be a better solution
>> for me, and I have a few questions...
>>
>> Is it as secure as the VNC over SSH tunnel method in all respects?
>>
> That depends really on what encryption they're using - this doesn't seem
> to be documented anywhere though. I doubt it'll have quite the same
> level of rigorous testing as openssh has been through though (unless
> they're using openssl under the hood anyway). That's unlikely to make
> any difference for this sort of usage though.
>
>> Can the VNC service be run on a non-standard port (if desired) using the
>> 'native' (XP SP3) Windows Firewall?
>>
>> Would it be possible to run Personal Edition 'side by side' with the free
>> version (on the same target machine) to provide a backup method?
>>
> You'd be best addressing these to the RealVNC support/sales emails. I
> don't see why you shouldn't be able to run it on a non-standard port
> though. Running it side-by-side is likely to be problematic though.
>
>> I'm still on a dialup connection (with no hope of getting broadband
>> anytime soon) and the VNC/SSH combination I'd been using, while slow, was
>> 'survivable'... and a good bit faster than the web access service I had
>> as backup.
>>
>> With the added encryption overhead, will the Personal Edition of RealVNC
>> likely be noticeably slower than the free version?
>>
> Shouldn't be - you're trading the ssh encryption overhead for the
> RealVNC encryption overhead.
>
> The alternative is to stick with ssh - you should be able to run openssh
> server with cygwin, or freeSSHd (www.freesshd.com) is a more
> user-friendly server.
>
> Cheers,
> Robin
> --
> ___
> ( ' } | Robin Hill <robin@robinhill.me.uk> |
> / / ) | Little Jim says .... |
> // !! | "He fallen in de water !!" |
>
> _______________________________________________
> VNC-List mailing list
> VNC-List@realvnc.com
> To remove yourself from the list visit:
> http://www.realvnc.com/mailman/listinfo/vnc-list

Dale Eshelman
eshelmand@gmail.com

MonaVie (Distr ID 1316953)
http://www.monavie.com/Web/US/en/product_overview.dhtml

The closer I get to the pain of glass in Windoz, the farther I can see and I see a Mac on the horizon.

_______________________________________________
VNC-List mailing list
VNC-List@realvnc.com
To remove yourself from the list visit:
http://www.realvnc.com/mailman/listinfo/vnc-list

Re: Questions About RealVNC Personal Edition... [ In reply to ]

mbmiller+l at gmail

Dec 17, 2009, 10:48 AM

Post #6 of 6 (5335 views)

Permalink

On Wed, 16 Dec 2009, Dale Eshelman wrote:

> The short answer is NO

But what was the question? I don't see questions in the message you
responded to, but there were about four questions in the message before
that quoted below. Maybe the short answer was "NO" to all four of those
questions.

Mike

> On Dec 15, 2009, at 08:23 AM, Robin Hill wrote:
>
>> On Thu Dec 10, 2009 at 05:01:44PM -0600, Peter Bunn wrote:
>>
>>> I'm wondering if the RealVNC Personal Edition would be a better solution
>>> for me, and I have a few questions...
>>>
>>> Is it as secure as the VNC over SSH tunnel method in all respects?
>>>
>> That depends really on what encryption they're using - this doesn't seem
>> to be documented anywhere though. I doubt it'll have quite the same
>> level of rigorous testing as openssh has been through though (unless
>> they're using openssl under the hood anyway). That's unlikely to make
>> any difference for this sort of usage though.
>>
>>> Can the VNC service be run on a non-standard port (if desired) using the
>>> 'native' (XP SP3) Windows Firewall?
>>>
>>> Would it be possible to run Personal Edition 'side by side' with the free
>>> version (on the same target machine) to provide a backup method?
>>>
>> You'd be best addressing these to the RealVNC support/sales emails. I
>> don't see why you shouldn't be able to run it on a non-standard port
>> though. Running it side-by-side is likely to be problematic though.
>>
>>> I'm still on a dialup connection (with no hope of getting broadband
>>> anytime soon) and the VNC/SSH combination I'd been using, while slow, was
>>> 'survivable'... and a good bit faster than the web access service I had
>>> as backup.
>>>
>>> With the added encryption overhead, will the Personal Edition of RealVNC
>>> likely be noticeably slower than the free version?
>>>
>> Shouldn't be - you're trading the ssh encryption overhead for the
>> RealVNC encryption overhead.
>>
>> The alternative is to stick with ssh - you should be able to run openssh
>> server with cygwin, or freeSSHd (www.freesshd.com) is a more
>> user-friendly server.
>>
>> Cheers,
>> Robin
>> --
>> ___
>> ( ' } | Robin Hill <robin@robinhill.me.uk> |
>> / / ) | Little Jim says .... |
>> // !! | "He fallen in de water !!" |

_______________________________________________
VNC-List mailing list
VNC-List@realvnc.com
To remove yourself from the list visit:
http://www.realvnc.com/mailman/listinfo/vnc-list