Re: Wireless security
- From: goarilla <"kevin DOT paulus AT skynet DOT be">
- Date: Mon, 26 Nov 2007 02:55:23 +0100
Timothy Murphy wrote:
goarilla <"kevin DOT paulus AT skynet DOT be"> wrote:huh so telnetd is not enabled or filtered at that host what does that have to do with anything
It is actually easier to use ssh/scp than rsh or telnet,huh ?
so the issue does not arise there.
telnet is a lot easier than ssh !
[tim@elizabeth ~]$ telnet alfred
Trying 192.168.2.1...
telnet: connect to address 192.168.2.1: Connection refused
[tim@elizabeth ~]$ ssh alfred
Last login: Sun Nov 25 23:19:25 2007 from 192.168.2.11
the only thing i can think of you finding telnet easier is that if you type something wrong
at login you're basically screwed, since PUSH packets are send at every instance of user
input
you seem to have PKI enabled and thus use keys, did you read some doc's or some howto's on how to do that
or did that knowledge simply came to you in a vision ?
well it's a lot easier to setup a telnet deamon ... than a sshd daemon.
and well ... you don't have to use telnet for just telnet it's much much more
although nc is the better tool for that, telnet still is the most common on multiple platforms.
even microsoft includes a telnet client, although it's a pretty broken version.
.
- Follow-Ups:
- Re: Wireless security
- From: Nikos Chantziaras
- Re: Wireless security
- References:
- Wireless security
- From: Baho Utot
- Re: Wireless security
- From: Wolfgang Draxinger
- Re: Wireless security
- From: Timothy Murphy
- Re: Wireless security
- From: Moe Trin
- Re: Wireless security
- From: Timothy Murphy
- Re: Wireless security
- From: Moe Trin
- Re: Wireless security
- From: Timothy Murphy
- Re: Wireless security
- From: goarilla
- Re: Wireless security
- From: Timothy Murphy
- Wireless security
- Prev by Date: Re: Ethernet bridging with bridge-utils kills WAN
- Next by Date: Re: Wireless security
- Previous by thread: Re: Wireless security
- Next by thread: Re: Wireless security
- Index(es):
Relevant Pages
|