[39856] in North American Network Operators' Group
Re: 'we should all be uncomfortable with the extent to which luck ..'
daemon@ATHENA.MIT.EDU (David Shaw)
Wed Jul 25 15:22:34 2001
Date: Wed, 25 Jul 2001 15:21:56 -0400
From: David Shaw <dshaw@jabberwocky.com>
To: Valdis.Kletnieks@vt.edu
Cc: Roeland Meyer <rmeyer@mhsc.com>, "'k claffy'" <kc@ipn.caida.org>,
nanog@nanog.org, caida@caida.org
Message-ID: <20010725152156.A2751@akamai.com>
Mail-Followup-To: Valdis.Kletnieks@vt.edu,
Roeland Meyer <rmeyer@mhsc.com>, 'k claffy' <kc@ipn.caida.org>,
nanog@nanog.org, caida@caida.org
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Disposition: inline
In-Reply-To: <200107251859.f6PIxxP20573@foo-bar-baz.cc.vt.edu>; from Valdis.Kletnieks@vt.edu on Wed, Jul 25, 2001 at 02:59:59PM -0400
Errors-To: owner-nanog-outgoing@merit.edu
On Wed, Jul 25, 2001 at 02:59:59PM -0400, Valdis.Kletnieks@vt.edu wrote:
> On Wed, 25 Jul 2001 14:45:44 EDT, David Shaw said:
>
> > telnetd is not inherently bad. It is a tool that is lacking the
> > session encryption and strong authentication features of SSH, but is
>
> See RFCs 2941 through 2953. Just because your telnetd doesn't implement
> it doesn't mean it's not available.
True :) I should have said "usually lacking".
> Having said that, I still use ssh for most stuff. ;)
Oh, so do I. I was just pointing out while SSH is a wonderful thing,
for certain specific uses (logging in from an untrusted terminal being
one of them), there are better tools.
David
--
David Shaw | dshaw@jabberwocky.com | WWW http://www.jabberwocky.com/
+---------------------------------------------------------------------------+
"There are two major products that come out of Berkeley: LSD and UNIX.
We don't believe this to be a coincidence." - Jeremy S. Anderson
