Re: Telnet

From	Tim Woodall <debianuser@woodall.me.uk>
Newsgroups	linux.debian.user
Subject	Re: Telnet
Date	2023-12-04 11:40 +0100
Message-ID	<HHewN-b3cz-3@gated-at.bofh.it> (permalink)
References	(1 earlier) <HGGbL-aEsa-1@gated-at.bofh.it> <HGSwh-aM6O-1@gated-at.bofh.it> <HGXcB-aOYL-5@gated-at.bofh.it> <HGZR8-aQmS-7@gated-at.bofh.it> <HH00N-aQFd-13@gated-at.bofh.it>
Organization	linux.* mail to news gateway

Show all headers | View raw

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 remote host: Connection refused
>> charles@hawk:~$ telnet hawk 80
>> Trying 127.0.1.1...
>> Connected to hawk.localdomain.
>> Escape character is '^]'.
>> ^]
>> telnet> quit
>> Connection closed.
>> charles@hawk:~$
>
> Yes, there is plenty of use for the telnet *client*.  Nobody disputes this.
>
> 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 network might not remain there forever.
>
>

Agree with all of the above. However, the op was connecting to what
looks like a router address. It's possibly hardware that cannot be
updated, only replaced. (and I'm not sure, therefore, if this is a
debian question at all)

I have some (post 2020) motherboards whose ipmi does not work with jvm
post stretch, nor firefox post buster. So I have to keep an old setup
around.

You should never put these sorts of devices on the internet anyway. It
might be *nice* if we didn't have to use old 'insecure' protocols but
it's not *insecure* to do so. The IPMI in question are only accessible
via physical access (so network encryption is hardly helpful) or VPN
(which is kept up to date)

It has frustrated me that the browser writers have refused to
distinguish between rfc1918 (and equivalent ipv6) addresses and
publically routable addresses when it comes to warnings and refusals to
connect.

Some years ago I abandoned firefox because there was no way to override
one of its 'I'm sorry Dave, I'm afraid I can't do that' spasms.

It's crazy that they make things like certificate pinning *impossible*
to override. Another one that bit me - again hardware where the only way
to use https was to have it generate its own self signed certificate
that expired after a year. You can 'work around' but it's *expensive*
the first time you hit it as you end up losing other config. Sure, the
hardware was buggy...

Thread

Telnet William Torrez Corea <willitc9888@gmail.com> - 2023-12-02 17:00 +0100
  Re: Telnet Marco Moock <mm@dorfdsl.de> - 2023-12-02 17:10 +0100
    Re: Telnet Greg Wooledge <greg@wooledge.org> - 2023-12-02 17:20 +0100
    Re: Telnet William Torrez Corea <willitc9888@gmail.com> - 2023-12-02 17:40 +0100
  Re: Telnet Andy Smith <andy@strugglers.net> - 2023-12-02 23:00 +0100
    Re: Telnet Michel Verdier <mv524@free.fr> - 2023-12-03 12:10 +0100
      Re: Telnet Marco Moock <mm@dorfdsl.de> - 2023-12-03 17:10 +0100
        Re: Telnet Charles Curley <charlescurley@charlescurley.com> - 2023-12-03 20:00 +0100
          Re: Telnet Greg Wooledge <greg@wooledge.org> - 2023-12-03 20:10 +0100
            Re: Telnet Charles Curley <charlescurley@charlescurley.com> - 2023-12-03 20:30 +0100
              Re: Telnet debian-user@howorth.org.uk - 2023-12-03 21:30 +0100
                Re: Telnet Anssi Saari <anssi.saari@debian-user.mail.kapsi.fi> - 2023-12-04 11:30 +0100
                Re: Telnet gene heskett <gheskett@shentel.net> - 2023-12-04 12:40 +0100
                Re: Telnet debian-user@howorth.org.uk - 2023-12-04 17:20 +0100
                Re: Telnet Anssi Saari <anssi.saari@debian-user.mail.kapsi.fi> - 2023-12-05 11:20 +0100
            Re: Telnet Tim Woodall <debianuser@woodall.me.uk> - 2023-12-04 11:40 +0100
              Re: Firefox, was: Telnet Michael Kjörling <2695bd53d63c@ewoof.net> - 2023-12-04 13:10 +0100
                Re: Firefox, was: Telnet Tim Woodall <debianuser@woodall.me.uk> - 2023-12-04 15:30 +0100
          Re: Telnet Nicolas George <george@nsup.org> - 2023-12-04 09:30 +0100
            Re: Telnet Marco Moock <mm@dorfdsl.de> - 2023-12-04 17:30 +0100
              Re: Telnet Nicolas George <george@nsup.org> - 2023-12-04 17:40 +0100
          Re: Telnet Marco Moock <mm@dorfdsl.de> - 2023-12-04 09:30 +0100
            Re: Telnet Curt <curty@free.fr> - 2023-12-04 17:30 +0100
              Re: Telnet Nicolas George <george@nsup.org> - 2023-12-04 17:40 +0100
                Re: Telnet Curt <curty@free.fr> - 2023-12-04 17:50 +0100
                Re: Telnet Nicolas George <george@nsup.org> - 2023-12-04 18:00 +0100
                Re: Telnet <tomas@tuxteam.de> - 2023-12-04 18:40 +0100
                Re: Telnet Nicolas George <george@nsup.org> - 2023-12-04 20:10 +0100
                Re: Telnet Nicolas George <george@nsup.org> - 2023-12-04 20:30 +0100
                Re: Telnet <tomas@tuxteam.de> - 2023-12-05 06:10 +0100
                Re: Telnet Nicolas George <george@nsup.org> - 2023-12-05 08:50 +0100
                Re: Telnet tomas@tuxteam.de - 2023-12-04 20:30 +0100
          Re: Telnet Nicolas George <george@nsup.org> - 2023-12-04 09:30 +0100
            Re: Telnet Nicholas Geovanis <nickgeovanis@gmail.com> - 2023-12-04 17:20 +0100
            Look, ma no telnet [was: Telnet] <tomas@tuxteam.de> - 2023-12-04 20:00 +0100
              Re: Look, ma no telnet [was: Telnet] <tomas@tuxteam.de> - 2023-12-04 20:10 +0100
              Re: Look, ma no telnet [was: Telnet] Nicolas George <george@nsup.org> - 2023-12-04 20:10 +0100

csiph-web