Joe Landman wrote: > This is interesting. Someone once had mentioned to me that the > "blowfish" encryption was the best for performance (e.g. least > expensive), though I have not ascertained whether or not this is true by > rigorous measurement. Blowfish being the least CPU intensive is mentioned in the ssh man page (at least on my FreeBSD box) but from using it over some time, I don't see much of a difference between using blowfish vs. the default 3des. CPU architectures also make a difference in my limited experience. Our old EV6 Alpha for example is painfully slow when using scp, even slower than the old PIII-800 I have but blazingly fast at other tasks.