Skip to Main Content
Integration


This is an IBM Automation portal for Integration products. To view all of your ideas submitted to IBM, create and manage groups of Ideas, or create an idea explicitly set to be either visible by all (public) or visible only to you and IBM (private), use the IBM Unified Ideas Portal (https://ideas.ibm.com).


Shape the future of IBM!

We invite you to shape the future of IBM, including product roadmaps, by submitting ideas that matter to you the most. Here's how it works:

Search existing ideas

Start by searching and reviewing ideas and requests to enhance a product or service. Take a look at ideas others have posted, and add a comment, vote, or subscribe to updates on them if they matter to you. If you can't find what you are looking for,

Post your ideas
  1. Post an idea.

  2. Get feedback from the IBM team and other customers to refine your idea.

  3. Follow the idea through the IBM Ideas process.


Specific links you will want to bookmark for future use

Welcome to the IBM Ideas Portal (https://www.ibm.com/ideas) - Use this site to find out additional information and details about the IBM Ideas process and statuses.

IBM Unified Ideas Portal (https://ideas.ibm.com) - Use this site to view all of your ideas, create new ideas for any IBM product, or search for ideas across all of IBM.

ideasibm@us.ibm.com - Use this email to suggest enhancements to the Ideas process or request help from IBM for submitting your Ideas.


Status Functionality already exists
Workspace App Connect
Created by Guest
Created on Apr 4, 2013

Change FtpServer propiertes StrictHostcheking=NO or known_host_file in /dev/null using HA

For configurable service FtpServer Properties SSH: deleting requested known_hosts_file checkup or not validate the key SSH in the file known_hosts. In AIX environment using HACMP.

Idea priority High
RFE ID 33241
RFE URL
RFE Product IBM App Connect Enterprise (formerly IBM Integration Bus)
  • Admin
    Ben Thompson
    Reply
    |
    Jul 30, 2021

    Idea / RFE Review. It is our strong suspicion that the behaviour described has moved forward over the long time period since this suggestion was initially raised. Current capabilities of the product (

    https://www.ibm.com/docs/en/app-connect/11.0.0?topic=sftp-known-host-checking) in this functional area allow you to configure whether or not strict known host checking is turned on, and then when the integration server attempts a connection it will check the host key against the contents of the known hosts file and if the key is not there the connection will fail. You can have multiple known hosts files and specify a different one for each policy. The known hosts files that you provide for strict known host checking are not modified by the integration server. Given the current product situation we are closing this idea but if we have somehow misunderstood the requirement or you feel something further is missing then please feel free to open a new idea making clear where you feel more attention is needed.

  • Guest
    Reply
    |
    Oct 7, 2015

    Due to processing by IBM, this request was reassigned to have the following updated attributes:
    Brand - WebSphere
    Product family - Integration
    Product - IBM Integration Bus (WebSphere Message Broker) - IIB

    For recording keeping, the previous attributes were:
    Brand - WebSphere
    Product family - Connectivity and Integration
    Product - IBM Integration Bus (WebSphere Message Broker) - IIB

  • Guest
    Reply
    |
    Dec 3, 2013

    Thanks for raising this requirement. If I understand correctly, this requirement is to allow the user to turn off checking of the known_hosts file in the scenario where the broker is running in a highly available environment. File and (S)FTP support is very important for us, and we are planning on a set of features around the file-based nodes for a follow-on release, and will look at this feature as part of this work. Once the engineering is done we will evaluate the feasibility of a back-port to earlier versions.

  • Guest
    Reply
    |
    Aug 19, 2013

    Team, what state has the evaluation of this requirement?