Originally Posted by Dev-Dave
I think you maybe a little confused because of the statement below as wireless dose not use sshfs for its security, it only lets it pass though encrypting it with its own security on the wireless router. 
|
You are correct, but that encryption is used for a different purpose, it's to isolate networks from each other ie. give the illusion of a wire, and not everyone can/wants to use WEP2/AES (not that AES2 is 100% safe for this purpose either)
Any type of MITM (cracked wireless, snmp enabled switch or any number of other common scenarios) will still give your attacker full credentials in no time unless you use something like ssh, it's just common sense.
For the web it's easier just to implement http get/put instead of anonymous ftp and embedded systems can use tftp. ftp really doesn't have a valid use case in the current protocol landscape except for (weak) backward compatibility. For example, there's no single standard way of downloading full directory trees over ftp, which makes it no better than http.
That's why it's a bad idea to *ever* use ftp or telnet.
************* [ - Post Merged - ] *************
To clarify, the internet is not the fun and cozy place it was in 1992 anymore.
And to make matters worse, you shouldn't expect your LAN to be any safer.
In any corner of your house or office there may be a rooted windows box, or a badly coded embedded system (router, music player, tv, tablet, phone etc.) which is a direct entry point onto your home/office network.
Someone might think messing with you is a prank since you leave your door open, but you may not find the prank as funny.
Taking security to this level is nowadays an absolute requirement, otherwise it's an open invitation for trouble.
************* [ - Post Merged - ] *************
You may ignore my rant above, since it wasn't really meant for any technical user, possibly just for a few uninformed readers.
I am fully aware that it involves a boatload of work, but the addition of sshfs mounting in multiman, could eliminate the need for a usb hdd, and replacement internal hdd for consoles with small (20G?) drives.
Since a typical desktop PC has terabytes of storage nowadays, the directories could be shared over network.
A network mounted drive with a 100mbit network usually results in much better performance in practice than reading straight from a sata drive since it offloads buses, controllers and cpu, which are now free to do other stuff, like load your game into memory