‹ BackHN Continuity

Thread

VSCode's SSH Agent Is Bananas (2025)

310 points · 218 comments · Rapzid

  1. danielklnstein · · focus · HN ↗
    Missing a (2025)

    FYI VSCode's SSH Agent is a godsend for remote development - the "disadvantages" that Fly lists are part of its advantages. I've worked in several teams that have made extensive use of the extension, and it's never been an issue. You can restrict SSH access arbitrarily to ensure whatever security or access guardrails you need.

    1. godelski · · focus · HN ↗
      As a Linux user I've hated VSCode's ssh. There's lot of annoying things that make it harder to admin for. Like it doesn't pick up the MotD, preventing me from showing users important messages. I've found that it also doesn't reuse sessions (at least by default. TBF, neither does ssh) and I'll find that there's just dozens of open sessions over months from users. I literally had to write a script to boot people...

      It would be one thing if the plugin was just a wrapper and people were still expected to know ssh but the plugin abstracts away all that and is intended to make it a "use VSCode on remote machine" tool. So it needs to do more than just handle creds, otherwise it creates a divergent experience while making people think it's just ssh

      1. Joker_vD · · focus · HN ↗
        I don't think I've ever paid attention to a MotD on any of the servers I had a ssh access to... what do people put there?
        1. godelski · · focus · HN ↗

            > what do people put there?
          
            \033[1;31mCLEAN YOUR FUCKING DRIVE OR I'LL DO IT FOR YOU!\033[0m
          
          You know, typical admin stuff
          1. Joker_vD · · focus · HN ↗
            Ah, I see. Our admins typically understood that users were being given disk quotas precisely so that they could use that disk space, but that's probably not a universal stance.
            1. literalAardvark · · focus · HN ↗
              It's really not.

              Quotas mean "more than this is clearly too much" not "please use this space".

              In good times nobody minds, but in bad times when you just can't extend the drive you have to tell people off. Part of the job of making sure the system can continue to work for what you need it, under _real_ constraints.

              You may have to delete stuff, you may have to shut the server down to save power. You may have to limit clock speeds. It depends on the environment and "it really should work because it should be covered by next day on site warranty and you could download more ram" often doesn't apply.

              1. dspillett · · focus · HN ↗
                > Quotas mean "more than this is clearly too much" not "please use this space".

                Ah, memories of Uni, back when storage was fairly expensive, where we had both hard and soft quotas. The soft quota would allow for temporary growth of build artefacts and things¹ but you would get stern emails if you were over your soft quota for 24 hours, and if you persisted without good reason³ your hard quota would be reduced so you effectively have no soft quota any more.

                --------

                [1] some machines had no local storage that the user could touch so putting them there was not always possible, some people on Windows machines had local storage but didn't have the relevant tools locally so were actually running things on the shared server(s)² instead of that just being a storage resource

                [2] via telnet/rsh/rlogin: yes, I am that old… SSH was a thing by that point, though OpenSSH wasn't, and I was using it where available, but the use of older plain-text protocols was still far far more common

                [3] it wasn't actually difficult to justify a quota extension for project work, in fact people enrolled on certain modules got higher quotas automatically

                1. zie · · focus · HN ↗
                  > Ah, memories of Uni, back when storage was fairly expensive, where we had both hard and soft quotas.

                  Don't worry, disk got expensive again. Disks are usually at least 2X more expensive than a year ago currently. Sometimes 3X more.

                  1. dspillett · · focus · HN ↗
                    Not nearly as expensive as it was back then, at least not yet, even accounting for inflation.
                    1. zie · · focus · HN ↗
                      Yes, let's hope it doesn't get even more expensive. Around here we are purposely not upgrading hardware unless we have to, hoping to ride through the price increases. I'm sure lots of people are doing the same thing, which probably won't help much once prices start to come back down... assuming they do.
Open on Hacker News to reply ↗

Unofficial Hacker News client; not affiliated with Y Combinator.