debian-u...@howorth.org.uk writes:
> gene heskett wrote:
>> On 12/4/23 05:22, Anssi Saari wrote:
>> > debian-u...@howorth.org.uk writes:
>> >
>> >>> I concur, and would add that even on an isolated network one
>> >>> should prefer ssh. First, to be in the right habit. Second
>> >>> because it
to...@tuxteam.de (12023-12-05):
> It does have a line mode with local echo (meaning you can type without
> anything
> being sent until you hit ENTER, with limited line editing capabilities
> (backspace
> and things). No readline's full power, though: that was more like a
> Christmas's
> wish :-)
On Mon, Dec 04, 2023 at 08:29:04PM +0100, Nicolas George wrote:
> to...@tuxteam.de (12023-12-04):
> > Back then (TM) (must have been 1990ies or so) I knew. And I sometimes still
> > miss the "easy interactivity". I haven't investigated whether there is an
> > equivalent socat mode (say line-mode wi
to...@tuxteam.de (12023-12-04):
> Back then (TM) (must have been 1990ies or so) I knew. And I sometimes still
> miss the "easy interactivity". I haven't investigated whether there is an
> equivalent socat mode (say line-mode with readline editing or something). That
> would be a market niche, would
On Mon, Dec 04, 2023 at 08:04:40PM +0100, Nicolas George wrote:
> to...@tuxteam.de (12023-12-04):
> > Which, in the case of interaction with HTTP (and most others) actually
> > comes in handy. Those explicit \r\n get old pretty fast...
>
> Just hope you will not need to emit a LATIN SMALL LETTER Y
to...@tuxteam.de (12023-12-04):
> Which, in the case of interaction with HTTP (and most others) actually
> comes in handy. Those explicit \r\n get old pretty fast...
Just hope you will not need to emit a LATIN SMALL LETTER Y WITH
DIAERESIS in ISO-8859-1.
Anyway, the treatment done by telnet is no
On Mon, Dec 04, 2023 at 05:32:20PM +0100, Nicolas George wrote:
> Curt (12023-12-04):
> > Telnet doesn't alter the actual data being transmitted
>
> Yes it does, read the doc before posting wrong information here.
Which, in the case of interaction with HTTP (and most others) actually
comes in han
Curt (12023-12-04):
> I think you're buggering yet another fly here.
I think you should read the docs and shut up. I know what I am saying.
--
Nicolas George
On 2023-12-04, Nicolas George wrote:
> Curt (12023-12-04):
>> Telnet doesn't alter the actual data being transmitted
>
> Yes it does, read the doc before posting wrong information here.
>
I think you're buggering yet another fly here.
Curt (12023-12-04):
> Telnet doesn't alter the actual data being transmitted
Yes it does, read the doc before posting wrong information here.
--
Nicolas George
Marco Moock (12023-12-04):
> Is that really the case?
Yes.
> Other applications like telnet or vi don't care about it, so I
> assume(d), it is up to the application to handle it.
Applications can decide to change the mode of the tty or catch SIGINT.
Regards,
--
Nicolas George
Am 04.12.2023 um 09:28:30 Uhr schrieb Nicolas George:
> Marco Moock (12023-12-04):
> > ncat also uses ^C to kill the process.
>
> No, this effect of ^C is part of the operating system.
Is that really the case?
Other applications like telnet or vi don't care about it, so I
assume(d), it is up
On 2023-12-04, Marco Moock wrote:
> Am 04.12.2023 um 09:23:16 Uhr schrieb Nicolas George:
>
>> If you want to test a network protocol, you should use a really
>> transparent client. Traditionally people use netcat (nc), but it
>> handles EOF approximatively.
>
> ncat also uses ^C to kill the proce
gene heskett wrote:
> On 12/4/23 05:22, Anssi Saari wrote:
> > debian-u...@howorth.org.uk writes:
> >
> >>> I concur, and would add that even on an isolated network one
> >>> should prefer ssh. First, to be in the right habit. Second
> >>> because it will do things that telnet won't, like tunne
On Mon, Dec 4, 2023, 2:23 AM Nicolas George wrote:
> Charles Curley (12023-12-03):
> > True. None the less, there is at least one perfectly good use for
> > telnet: testing connections to servers.
>
> Wrong. The telnet client is not entirely transparent, as the telnet
> protocol defines an escape
On 04/12/2023 11:30, gene heskett wrote:
On 12/4/23 05:22, Anssi Saari wrote:
debian-u...@howorth.org.uk writes:
I concur, and would add that even on an isolated network one should
prefer ssh. First, to be in the right habit. Second because it will do
things that telnet won't, like tunnel X.
On 12/4/23 05:22, Anssi Saari wrote:
debian-u...@howorth.org.uk writes:
I concur, and would add that even on an isolated network one should
prefer ssh. First, to be in the right habit. Second because it will do
things that telnet won't, like tunnel X.
Ah but will it tunnel wayland?? Enquiring
On Sun, 3 Dec 2023, Greg Wooledge wrote:
On Sun, Dec 03, 2023 at 11:52:51AM -0700, Charles Curley wrote:
True. None the less, there is at least one perfectly good use for
telnet: testing connections to servers.
charles@hawk:~$ telnet hawk
Trying 127.0.1.1...
telnet: Unable to connect to remot
debian-u...@howorth.org.uk writes:
>> I concur, and would add that even on an isolated network one should
>> prefer ssh. First, to be in the right habit. Second because it will do
>> things that telnet won't, like tunnel X.
>
> Ah but will it tunnel wayland?? Enquiring minds want to know :)
Yes.
Marco Moock (12023-12-04):
> ncat also uses ^C to kill the process.
No, this effect of ^C is part of the operating system.
Regards,
--
Nicolas George
Am 04.12.2023 um 09:23:16 Uhr schrieb Nicolas George:
> If you want to test a network protocol, you should use a really
> transparent client. Traditionally people use netcat (nc), but it
> handles EOF approximatively.
ncat also uses ^C to kill the process.
Charles Curley (12023-12-03):
> True. None the less, there is at least one perfectly good use for
> telnet: testing connections to servers.
Wrong. The telnet client is not entirely transparent, as the telnet
protocol defines an escape octet to introduce commands.
If you want to test a network pro
Charles Curley wrote:
> On Sun, 3 Dec 2023 14:01:38 -0500
> Greg Wooledge wrote:
>
> > The question is whether anyone should be running a telnetd *server*.
> > On an isolated network, it might be acceptable. But it's really a
> > bad habit that should be stomped out aggressively, as machines
>
On Sun, 3 Dec 2023 14:01:38 -0500
Greg Wooledge wrote:
> The question is whether anyone should be running a telnetd *server*.
> On an isolated network, it might be acceptable. But it's really a bad
> habit that should be stomped out aggressively, as machines which are
> currently on an isolated
On Sun, Dec 03, 2023 at 11:52:51AM -0700, Charles Curley wrote:
> On Sun, 3 Dec 2023 17:00:44 +0100
> Marco Moock wrote:
>
> > >
> > > How do you find 1994? It seems to be a mail from yesterday:
> >
> > For me it sounded like a joke.
> >
> > Telnet is unencrypted (although it is possible to
On Sun, 3 Dec 2023 17:00:44 +0100
Marco Moock wrote:
> >
> > How do you find 1994? It seems to be a mail from yesterday:
>
> For me it sounded like a joke.
>
> Telnet is unencrypted (although it is possible to run it over TLS to
> encrypt it) and SSH exists more than 20 years.
True. None th
Am 03.12.2023 um 12:06:40 Uhr schrieb Michel Verdier:
> On 2023-12-02, Andy Smith wrote:
>
> > Can someone examine the list's configuration? This email from 1994
> > seems to have only just been delivered.
>
> How do you find 1994? It seems to be a mail from yesterday:
For me it sounded like
On 2023-12-02, Andy Smith wrote:
> Can someone examine the list's configuration? This email from 1994
> seems to have only just been delivered.
How do you find 1994? It seems to be a mail from yesterday:
Received: from mail-lf1-x12d.google.com (mail-lf1-x12d.google.com
[IPv6:2a00:1450:4864:20::
Hello,
On Sat, Dec 02, 2023 at 09:50:00AM -0600, William Torrez Corea wrote:
> My telnet not operate, try connect my laptop by means of telnet:
Can someone examine the list's configuration? This email from 1994
seems to have only just been delivered.
Thanks,
Andy
--
https://bitfolk.com/ -- No-
On Sat, Dec 02, 2023 at 05:01:37PM +0100, Marco Moock wrote:
> Am 02.12.2023 um 09:50:00 Uhr schrieb William Torrez Corea:
>
> > sudo telnet 192.168.1.1
Also, just for the record, there is *no* need to use sudo here.
Am 02.12.2023 um 09:50:00 Uhr schrieb William Torrez Corea:
> sudo telnet 192.168.1.1
> > Trying 192.168.1.1...
> > Connected to 192.168.1.1.
> > Escape character is '^]'.
That means that the telnet connection was successful
> > Telnet connection from 192.168.1.5:55670 refused.
That means that
Try:
# aptitude why-not telnet
On 09/29/2012 06:46 PM, lina wrote:
> Hi,
>
> I have the harden-clients installed.
>
> when I tried to install the telnet,
>
> it showed me conflict.
>
> # aptitude why telnet
> Unable to find a reason to install telnet.
>
> I am just curious how telnet work. I
I think that is because everything in telnet is sent in plaintext...
password included. It is also vulnerable to man-in-the-middle attacks.
See : http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Telnet#Security
2012/9/29 lina :
> Hi,
>
> I have the harden-clients installed.
>
> when I tried to install the telnet,
>
Todd A. Jacobs wrote:
On Sun, Oct 28, 2007 at 09:37:06PM -0700, Jeff Grossman wrote:
or mc it does not show any lines just funky characters for the lines.
Just a shot in the dark, but I've occasionally run into weird problems
where one system has UTF-8 support installed while the othe
On Sun, Oct 28, 2007 at 09:37:06PM -0700, Jeff Grossman wrote:
> or mc it does not show any lines just funky characters for the lines.
Just a shot in the dark, but I've occasionally run into weird problems
where one system has UTF-8 support installed while the other doesn't.
Make sure both system
Douglas A. Tutty wrote:
On Wed, Nov 07, 2007 at 07:24:27PM -0800, Jeff Grossman wrote:
s. keeling wrote:
Your problem isn't related to locale. I suspect it's your terminal
emulation that's buggered. Are you using xterm, rxvt, or one of the
clueless children (kterm/gnome-terminal)
On Wed, Nov 07, 2007 at 07:24:27PM -0800, Jeff Grossman wrote:
> s. keeling wrote:
> >Your problem isn't related to locale. I suspect it's your terminal
> >emulation that's buggered. Are you using xterm, rxvt, or one of the
> >clueless children (kterm/gnome-terminal)?
> >
> I am using TERM=linux
s. keeling wrote:
Jeff Grossman <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>:
s. keeling wrote:
Jeff Grossman <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>:
Douglas A. Tutty wrote:
On Mon, Oct 29, 2007 at 06:03:01AM -0700, Jeff Grossman wrote:
If I do an 'export LC_ALL=C' then term=l
Jeff Grossman <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>:
> s. keeling wrote:
> > Jeff Grossman <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>:
> >
> >>> Douglas A. Tutty wrote:
> >>>
> On Mon, Oct 29, 2007 at 06:03:01AM -0700, Jeff Grossman wrote:
>
> > If I do an 'export LC_ALL=C' then term=linux and term=screen
s. keeling wrote:
Jeff Grossman <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>:
Douglas A. Tutty wrote:
On Mon, Oct 29, 2007 at 06:03:01AM -0700, Jeff Grossman wrote:
If I do an 'export LC_ALL=C' then term=linux and term=screen appear to
act the same. The display is much better but still not perfect.
Jeff Grossman <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>:
> > Douglas A. Tutty wrote:
> >> On Mon, Oct 29, 2007 at 06:03:01AM -0700, Jeff Grossman wrote:
> >>>
> >>> If I do an 'export LC_ALL=C' then term=linux and term=screen appear to
> >>> act the same. The display is much better but still not perfect. I
> >>> have
> Douglas A. Tutty wrote:
>> On Mon, Oct 29, 2007 at 06:03:01AM -0700, Jeff Grossman wrote:
>> >
>>
>>> If I do an 'export LC_ALL=C' then term=linux and term=screen appear to
>>> act the same. The display is much better but still not perfect. I
>>> have
>>> updated a new picture at http://www.st
Douglas A. Tutty wrote:
On Mon, Oct 29, 2007 at 06:03:01AM -0700, Jeff Grossman wrote:
>
If I do an 'export LC_ALL=C' then term=linux and term=screen appear to
act the same. The display is much better but still not perfect. I have
updated a new picture at http://www.stikman.com/mcdispla
On Mon, Oct 29, 2007 at 06:03:01AM -0700, Jeff Grossman wrote:
>
> If I do an 'export LC_ALL=C' then term=linux and term=screen appear to
> act the same. The display is much better but still not perfect. I have
> updated a new picture at http://www.stikman.com/mcdisplay1.jpg.
>
What about
Douglas A. Tutty wrote:
On Mon, Oct 29, 2007 at 05:43:54AM -0700, Jeff Grossman wrote:
On Oct 28, 2007, at 10:37 PM, Jeff Grossman wrote:
I do all of my administration on my Debian system using either Telnet
or SSH from a remote computer. But, when I run programs like aptitude
or mc
On Mon, Oct 29, 2007 at 05:43:54AM -0700, Jeff Grossman wrote:
> >On Oct 28, 2007, at 10:37 PM, Jeff Grossman wrote:
> >
> >>I do all of my administration on my Debian system using either Telnet
> >>or SSH from a remote computer. But, when I run programs like aptitude
> >>or mc it does not show a
Tim Gruene wrote:
It might help to use a standard language setting, like
export LC_ALL=C
before you start the command.
On Sun, 28 Oct 2007, Jeff Grossman wrote:
I do all of my administration on my Debian system using either Telnet
or SSH from a remote computer. But, when I run programs like
Nate Duehr wrote:
On Oct 28, 2007, at 10:37 PM, Jeff Grossman wrote:
I do all of my administration on my Debian system using either Telnet
or SSH from a remote computer. But, when I run programs like aptitude
or mc it does not show any lines just funky characters for the lines.
I did a scree
It might help to use a standard language setting, like
export LC_ALL=C
before you start the command.
On Sun, 28 Oct 2007, Jeff Grossman wrote:
I do all of my administration on my Debian system using either Telnet or SSH
from a remote computer. But, when I run programs like aptitude or mc it d
On Oct 28, 2007, at 10:37 PM, Jeff Grossman wrote:
I do all of my administration on my Debian system using either
Telnet or SSH from a remote computer. But, when I run programs like
aptitude or mc it does not show any lines just funky characters for
the lines. I did a screen shot and put i
Dear Pol,I am interest is to configure POP3 client.Thanks > I can telnet to my server normally, BUT I can't
> telnet mailserver 110.
ok :-)
what do u do 4 connect?
Check where your mailserver listening (loopback only? or in which interface)
Which mailserver do u use?
which error message appe
On Tue, Jun 06, 2006 at 05:58:20 +0200, JB MORLA wrote:
> Hi,
>
> I've installed sshd and putty, I'd like to stop telnet permanently without
> removing it.
>
> Here is a Fedora command:
>
> [EMAIL PROTECTED] tmp]# chkconfig telnet off
>
> Is there a similar one under Debian?
The generic Debian
On Friday 10 March 2006 10:07, Jonathan P. Mwakijele wrote:
> Dear Brian,
>
> I am Redhat Linux user.
>
> I can telnet to my server normally, BUT I can't
> telnet mailserver 110.
>
> What might be a problem.
Anything. Ask a smarter question?
http://www.catb.org/~esr/faqs/smart-questions.html
--
> I can telnet to my server normally, BUT I can't
> telnet mailserver 110.
ok :-)
what do u do 4 connect?
Check where your mailserver listening (loopback only? or in which interface)
Which mailserver do u use?
which error message appear?
Pol
--
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
wit
Stephen Le wrote:
On 10/16/05, Aurelien Ricard <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
Stephen, try to put a telnet session in their ~/.bashrc
I've never tried but it should work.
While this works, it is insecure. A user can easily run a command like
'ssh [EMAIL PROTECTED] rm .bashrc' to delete th
On 10/16/05, Aurelien Ricard <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> Stephen, try to put a telnet session in their ~/.bashrc
> I've never tried but it should work.
While this works, it is insecure. A user can easily run a command like
'ssh [EMAIL PROTECTED] rm .bashrc' to delete the .bashrc file and get full
Benjamin A'Lee wrote:
On Sat, 2005-10-15 at 08:56 -0700, Stephen Le wrote:
Is it possible to change a user's login shell to an instance of telnet
to a user-unique port? When a user logs into my server, I'd like them
to be immediately dropped into a telnet session on a specific port
running o
On Sat, 2005-10-15 at 08:56 -0700, Stephen Le wrote:
> Is it possible to change a user's login shell to an instance of telnet
> to a user-unique port? When a user logs into my server, I'd like them
> to be immediately dropped into a telnet session on a specific port
> running on the server and to b
On Fri, 06 May 2005 08:58:50 +0500 (IST)
Arun Kumar <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> Sir ,
>
>I am new to qmail ,after the installation of qmail .the service
>qmail-smtp and qmail-send is running but i cant able to telnet it
>throughs following errors .
>
> The service are running
>
> [
Jacco Hoeve wrote:
Andreas Janssen wrote:
Jacco Hoeve (<[EMAIL PROTECTED]>) wrote:
One more quick question:
I am used to typing "telnet 0 port" .. but after I upgraded woody to
sarge "telnet 0" gives:
server01:/etc# telnet 0 25
telnet: could not resolve 0/25: Name or service not known
It does the s
> -Original Message-
> From: news [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Andreas Janssen
> Sent: Thursday, November 18, 2004 12:53 AM
> To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> Subject: Re: telnet problem
>
> Hello
>
> Jacco Hoeve (<[EMAIL PROTECTED]>) wrote:
>
>
Hello
Jacco Hoeve (<[EMAIL PROTECTED]>) wrote:
> One more quick question:
>
> I am used to typing "telnet 0 port" .. but after I upgraded woody to
> sarge "telnet 0" gives:
>
> server01:/etc# telnet 0 25
> telnet: could not resolve 0/25: Name or service not known
Use the full IP address or nam
Scott wrote:
> Any other suggestions? It just appears telnet is broke on woody.
telnet works fine on woody. I hate to admit to it but we have it
installed on all of our machines and it works fine. I recommend using
telnetd-ssl insetad of telnetd becuase ssh will nag you about it
otherwise. A d
Thanks, Shaun. No luck:
> I am no xinetd guru, but if I were to guess I'd say there's
> something wrong with the "user=nobody" line. If the telnet
> daemon starts as nobody, it won't be able to gain the
> permissions of the user that wants to login.
>
> $ ls -l /usr/lib/telnetlogin
> -rwsr-xr--
On Tue, Oct 07, 2003 at 01:46:43PM -0300, Agustín Ciciliani wrote:
> These are some of the mail servers that I can't reach with my Debian:
> mail.matrocolayasoc.com.ar, mail.skytel.com.ar, mail.ecogas.com.ar, and
> others...
Do you have ECN enabled in your kernel? You can check this by doing
"cat
On Tue, Oct 07, 2003 at 01:46:43PM -0300, Agustín Ciciliani wrote:
| Hi Everybody,
|
| I'm having an issue with qmail and my server to send mails to some domains.
| Here is the error. This have been happening for three weeks.
Have you looked in the logs? I have never used qmail and am not
famili
[EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
>
> If I run telnet localhost 22 then I have to wait 15-30 seconds before it
> connects; with telnet 127.0.0.1 22 it connects at once. I have the same
> results using other open ports.
Does
telnet -4 localhost
give the same delay? If not, then the problem is IP
* Shyamal Prasad ([EMAIL PROTECTED]) [030816 13:59]:
> "Rupert" == RUPERT LEVENE <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
>
> Rupert> Shyamal Prasad <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> >> "Rupert" == RUPERT LEVENE <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
>
> Rupert> Antony Gelberg <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
Mental Patient <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> RUPERT LEVENE wrote:
>> Indeed. Netcat and galeon appear to do the right thing too, while
>> telnet, lynx and links all suffer from a delay. (I first noticed
>> the problem using lynx). My guess at the moment is that the
>> combination of a slow machine
RUPERT LEVENE wrote:
Indeed. Netcat and galeon appear to do the right thing too, while
telnet, lynx and links all suffer from a delay. (I first noticed the
problem using lynx). My guess at the moment is that the combination of
a slow machine and a slow nameserver is exposing an odd bug in these
pr
Shyamal Prasad <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> "Rupert" == RUPERT LEVENE <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> Rupert> Shyamal Prasad <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> >> "Rupert" == RUPERT LEVENE <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> Rupert> Antony Gelberg <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> >> >> On Sat,
"Rupert" == RUPERT LEVENE <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
Rupert> Shyamal Prasad <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>> "Rupert" == RUPERT LEVENE <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
Rupert> Antony Gelberg <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>> >> On Sat, Aug 16, 2003 at 12:25:16AM +0100,
>> >> [EMAIL P
Shyamal Prasad <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> "Rupert" == RUPERT LEVENE <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> Rupert> Antony Gelberg <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> >> On Sat, Aug 16, 2003 at 12:25:16AM +0100,
> >> [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
> >>> Running strace telnet localhost 22 shows that
"Rupert" == RUPERT LEVENE <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
Rupert> Antony Gelberg <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>> On Sat, Aug 16, 2003 at 12:25:16AM +0100,
>> [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
>>> Running strace telnet localhost 22 shows that it's trying to
>>> resolve the hostname localho
Antony Gelberg <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> On Sat, Aug 16, 2003 at 12:25:16AM +0100, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
>> If I run telnet localhost 22 then I have to wait 15-30 seconds
>> before it connects; with telnet 127.0.0.1 22 it connects at once. I
>> have the same results using other open ports.
>>
On Sat, Aug 16, 2003 at 12:25:16AM +0100, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
> If I run telnet localhost 22 then I have to wait 15-30 seconds before it
> connects; with telnet 127.0.0.1 22 it connects at once. I have the same
> results using other open ports.
>
> Running strace telnet localhost 22 shows tha
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
On Mon, Aug 04, 2003 at 09:08:56PM +0200, vinz wrote:
> Why can I not access my linux server as the root?
Because that's a very bad idea. You really should be using SSH if
you're going to be sending passwords anyway. Uninstall telnetd, get
ssh, forg
On Mon, 2003-08-04 at 15:08, vinz wrote:
> Why can I not access my linux server as the root?
Because it is brain dead to do that. Clear Text Passwords... plus it
allows someone to try direct hacking into a machine with a "absolutely
known" account.
Bare minimum would be SSH for ROOT. But even the
* vinz <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> [030804 21:08]:
> Why can I not access my linux server as the root?
For security reasons. Telnet transfers your password (or to be correct:
ALL transmitted data) in plain text.
Yours sincerely
Alexander
pgp0.pgp
Description: PGP signature
"vinz" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> 1. (*) text/plain ( ) text/html
(Please don't post to mailing lists using HTML; set your mailer to
send plain text only.)
> Why can I not access my linux server as the root?
It's easier to tell who did what, and is slightly more secure (
On Monday 04 August 2003 21:08, vinz wrote:
> Why can I not access my linux server as the root?
Don't use telnet, use SSH. Putty
(http://www.chiark.greenend.org.uk/~sgtatham/putty/) is a pretty good SSH
client and should do everything you need.
--
Got Backup?
--
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EM
On Tue, Jun 24, 2003 at 08:21:11AM -0400, Shawn Lamson wrote:
> On Mon, June 23 at 2:10 PM EDT
> - = k o l i s k o = - <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> > i am using on all woody machines commands like "telnet 0 25" or
> > "telnet 0 110" for telnet to localhost port.
> >
> > Since i upgraded to sarge
On Mon, June 23 at 2:10 PM EDT
- = k o l i s k o = - <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> Hi all,
>
> i am using on all woody machines commands like "telnet 0 25" or
> "telnet 0 110" for telnet to localhost port.
>
> Since i upgraded to sarge on few machines "telnet 0 port" dont work:
>
> 1 [EMAIL PRO
"Nathan" == Nathan Poznick <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
Nathan> Use localhost when you mean localhost? I wasn't aware
Nathan> that '0' was valid shorthand for localhost.
Actually it is. From RFC 1700 ("Assigned Numbers")
(a) {0, 0}
This host on this network. Can on
Thus spake Michal Kolesar:
> Hi all,
>
> i am using on all woody machines commands like "telnet 0 25" or "telnet
> 0 110" for telnet to localhost port.
>
> Since i upgraded to sarge on few machines "telnet 0 port" dont work:
> Any idea?
Use localhost when you mean localhost? I wasn't aware that
* Alvin Oga <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> [20030315 11:32 PST]:
> and "telnet localhost pop3s" or https fails simply because the other end
> wont speak to ya.. :-) .. woulda been nice to see which pop3s server but
> oh well
openssl s_client -connect $HOST:$PORT
good times,
Vineet
--
http://www.doorsto
On Sat, Mar 15, 2003 at 11:12:13AM -0800, Alvin Oga wrote:
> and "telnet localhost pop3s" or https fails simply because the other end
> wont speak to ya.. :-) .. woulda been nice to see which pop3s server but
> oh well
Have you tried it with telnet-ssl?
--
The freedoms that we enjoy presentl
On Sat, 15 Mar 2003, Colin Watson wrote:
> On Fri, Mar 14, 2003 at 12:09:59PM -0800, Alvin Oga wrote:
> > On Fri, 14 Mar 2003, Joao Paulo wrote:
> > > telnet is also very good (but for other things).
> > > telnet host 25
> > > telnet host 21
> > > ...
> >
> > but your firewall shoul
On Fri, Mar 14, 2003 at 12:09:59PM -0800, Alvin Oga wrote:
> On Fri, 14 Mar 2003, Joao Paulo wrote:
> > telnet is also very good (but for other things).
> > telnet host 25
> > telnet host 21
> > ...
>
> but your firewall should also block "the wrong protocols"
> connecting to the wrong
On Fri, 14 Mar 2003, Joao Paulo wrote:
> >
> >Telnet is considered harmful, use ssh instead.
yuppers... but
> >
> telnet is also very good (but for other things).
> telnet host 25
> telnet host 21
> ...
but your firewall should also block "the wrong protocols"
connecting to the wro
On Fri, Mar 14, 2003 at 11:43:44AM +, Joao Paulo wrote:
> telnet is also very good (but for other things).
>telnet host 25
>telnet host 21
>...
Yuck. Use 'nc' from the netcat package instead.
--
Nathan Norman - Incanus Networking mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Great minds discuss id
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
On Fri, Mar 14, 2003 at 11:43:44AM +, Joao Paulo wrote:
> telnet is also very good (but for other things).
>telnet host 25
>telnet host 21
>...
Well, of course, but using it for it's intended purpose (with telnetd)
is considered harmfu
Paul Johnson wrote:
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
On Fri, Mar 14, 2003 at 10:27:29AM +0100, ?ukasz Milewski wrote:
How to telnet to your comp in network from other network without
logging on router.
Fix your router so it's passing traffic (if your local network is
routable
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
On Fri, Mar 14, 2003 at 10:27:29AM +0100, ?ukasz Milewski wrote:
> How to telnet to your comp in network from other network without
> logging on router.
Fix your router so it's passing traffic (if your local network is
routable). If it's a private (
* ?ukasz Milewski <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> [14-03-2003 10:45]:
> How to telnet to your comp in network from other network without
> logging on router.
First of all I recommend using ssh, especially if you travel across
different networks.
I don't know what your setup looks like, but you should have a
On (08 Sep 02 20:36), Matthew Daubenspeck wrote:
> Is there a way to get that standard telnet command in a terminal
> window to support ANSI graphics?
>
> I am really embarrassed to mention why :)
The real issue here is the font the terminal is using (I'm assuming X
terminal? if it's on the cons
Matthew Daubenspeck said:
> Is there a way to get that standard telnet command in a terminal
> window to support ANSI graphics?
>
> I am really embarrassed to mention why :)
it doesn't depend upon the telnet command it depends upon
the terminal emulator(the "terminal window"). I prefer gnome-term
Carl Weidling, 2002-May-20 12:55 -0700:
> but if I try to telnet, I get:
> [EMAIL PROTECTED]:~$ telnet ragwind
> Trying 192.168.0.2...
> Connected to ragwind.loc.net.
> Escape character is '^]'.
>
> and that's it, it hangs until I quit out. ssh also hangs.
> (However, ftp see
Not sure if this helps, since I am just now installing debian for the 1st
time. If the file /etc/securetty exists, delete it, and root should be
able to telnet in to that machine. (from RH6.2-zoot)
At 10:59 AM 12/16/2001 -0500, Marc Britten wrote:
On Sun, 2001-12-16 at 02:36, Paul Scott wr
On Sun, 2001-12-16 at 02:36, Paul Scott wrote:
> Thanks, I was aware of that and these two machines are right next to
> each other and just used by me and my wife. OTOH I now realize that I
> should not setup or allow telnet at all. Is the setup for ssh exactly
> the same as for telnet. I d
1 - 100 of 388 matches
Mail list logo
