[gentoo-user] Alternative to netkit-telnetd

[gentoo-user] Alternative to netkit-telnetd

[Dan Johansson]

[-- Attachment #1: Type: text/plain, Size: 430 bytes --]

I only need a telnet client and not the whole server part. Any suggestions on 
alternatives to netkit-telnetd. The Client must behave just like the standard 
telnet-client (I have some expect-scripts using telnet).

Regards,
-- 
Dan Johansson, <http://www.dmj.nu>
***************************************************
This message is printed on 100% recycled electrons!
***************************************************

[-- Attachment #2: Type: application/pgp-signature, Size: 191 bytes --]

Re: [gentoo-user] Alternative to netkit-telnetd

[Michael Sullivan]

On Mon, 2006-04-24 at 19:58 +0200, Dan Johansson wrote:
> I only need a telnet client and not the whole server part. Any suggestions on 
> alternatives to netkit-telnetd. The Client must behave just like the standard 
> telnet-client (I have some expect-scripts using telnet).
> 
> Regards,

I think the one I use is called 'telnet-bsd'.  It's just the client...

-- 
gentoo-user@gentoo.org mailing list

Re: [gentoo-user] Alternative to netkit-telnetd

[Daniel da Veiga]

On 4/24/06, Dan Johansson <Dan.Johansson@dmj.nu> wrote:
> I only need a telnet client and not the whole server part. Any suggestions on
> alternatives to netkit-telnetd. The Client must behave just like the standard
> telnet-client (I have some expect-scripts using telnet).
>

Its lightweight, I mean extremely small, not more than a few minutes
(seconds?) compile time. Why don't you just emerge it and don't
activate the server?!

--
Daniel da Veiga
Computer Operator - RS - Brazil
-----BEGIN GEEK CODE BLOCK-----
Version: 3.1
GCM/IT/P/O d-? s:- a? C++$ UBLA++ P+ L++ E--- W+++$ N o+ K- w O M- V-
PS PE Y PGP- t+ 5 X+++ R+* tv b+ DI+++ D+ G+ e h+ r+ y++
------END GEEK CODE BLOCK------

-- 
gentoo-user@gentoo.org mailing list

Re: [gentoo-user] Alternative to netkit-telnetd

[Dan Johansson]

[-- Attachment #1: Type: text/plain, Size: 895 bytes --]

On Monday 24 April 2006 20:04, Michael Sullivan wrote:
> On Mon, 2006-04-24 at 19:58 +0200, Dan Johansson wrote:
> > I only need a telnet client and not the whole server part. Any
> > suggestions on alternatives to netkit-telnetd. The Client must behave
> > just like the standard telnet-client (I have some expect-scripts using
> > telnet).
> >
> > Regards,
>
> I think the one I use is called 'telnet-bsd'.  It's just the client...

Thanks for the tip, but it is also client + server. (:-(
>>> Merging net-misc/telnet-bsd-1.2 to /
--- /etc/
>>> /etc/xinetd.d/
>>> /etc/xinetd.d/telnetd
--- /usr/
--- /usr/bin/
>>> /usr/bin/telnet
--- /usr/sbin/
>>> /usr/sbin/in.telnetd

-- 
Dan Johansson, <http://www.dmj.nu>
***************************************************
This message is printed on 100% recycled electrons!
***************************************************

[-- Attachment #2: Type: application/pgp-signature, Size: 191 bytes --]

Re: [gentoo-user] Alternative to netkit-telnetd

[Peper]

> I only need a telnet client and not the whole server part. Any suggestions
> on alternatives to netkit-telnetd. The Client must behave just like the
> standard telnet-client (I have some expect-scripts using telnet).

netcat - the one and only.

-- 
Best Regards,
Peper
-- 
gentoo-user@gentoo.org mailing list

Re: [gentoo-user] Alternative to netkit-telnetd

[JimD]

Dan Johansson wrote:
> I only need a telnet client and not the whole server part. Any suggestions on 
> alternatives to netkit-telnetd. The Client must behave just like the standard 
> telnet-client (I have some expect-scripts using telnet).
> 
> Regards,


jim@keelie $ time sudo emerge -vb netkit-telnetd
real    0m13.975s
user    0m8.141s
sys     0m1.655s

netkit-telnetd is *very* small.  Just emerge it.  The server is not on
by default so you don't have to worry about it.  Or, if you are *really*
paranoid, emerge netkit-telnetd and then do this as root:

rm /etc/xinetd.d/telnetd /usr/sbin/telnetd

Now you only have a client!!

Jim
-- 
gentoo-user@gentoo.org mailing list

Re: [gentoo-user] Alternative to netkit-telnetd

[Alexander Skwar]

Dan Johansson wrote:
> On Monday 24 April 2006 20:04, Michael Sullivan wrote:
>> On Mon, 2006-04-24 at 19:58 +0200, Dan Johansson wrote:

>> > I only need a telnet client and not the whole server part. Any
[...]
>> I think the one I use is called 'telnet-bsd'.  It's just the client...
> 
> Thanks for the tip, but it is also client + server. (:-(

Uhm - so? Just leave the server disabled. Where's the problem?

Alexander Skwar
-- 
All possibility of understanding is rooted in the ability to say no.
		-- Susan Sontag
-- 
gentoo-user@gentoo.org mailing list

Re: [gentoo-user] Alternative to netkit-telnetd

[Dan Johansson]

[-- Attachment #1: Type: text/plain, Size: 942 bytes --]

On Tuesday 25 April 2006 07:33, Alexander Skwar wrote:
> Dan Johansson wrote:
> > On Monday 24 April 2006 20:04, Michael Sullivan wrote:
> >> On Mon, 2006-04-24 at 19:58 +0200, Dan Johansson wrote:
> >> > I only need a telnet client and not the whole server part. Any
>
> [...]
>
> >> I think the one I use is called 'telnet-bsd'.  It's just the client...
> >
> > Thanks for the tip, but it is also client + server. (:-(
>
> Uhm - so? Just leave the server disabled. Where's the problem?
Yes I know that I can just let the server disabled. But I was just wondering 
if there where any alternatives so that the server don't get started by 
"accident". Will probably delete the server after the emerge.

Tanks for your input!
-- 
Dan Johansson, <http://www.dmj.nu>
***************************************************
This message is printed on 100% recycled electrons!
***************************************************

[-- Attachment #2: Type: application/pgp-signature, Size: 191 bytes --]

Re: [gentoo-user] Alternative to netkit-telnetd

[kashani]

Dan Johansson wrote:
> Yes I know that I can just let the server disabled. But I was just wondering 
> if there where any alternatives so that the server don't get started by 
> "accident". Will probably delete the server after the emerge.
> 
> Tanks for your input!

	You might want to delete chmod and chown as well since files could 
accidentally get owned to another users or have its permissions changed. :-)

kashani
-- 
gentoo-user@gentoo.org mailing list

Re: [gentoo-user] Alternative to netkit-telnetd

[Neil Bothwick]

[-- Attachment #1: Type: text/plain, Size: 344 bytes --]

On Tue, 25 Apr 2006 10:44:12 -0700, kashani wrote:

> 	You might want to delete chmod and chown as well since files
> could accidentally get owned to another users or have its permissions
> changed. :-)

"rm -f /sbin/init" should remove the possibility of accidents :)


-- 
Neil Bothwick

Top Oxymorons Number 40: Same difference

[-- Attachment #2: signature.asc --]
[-- Type: application/pgp-signature, Size: 189 bytes --]

Re: [gentoo-user] Alternative to netkit-telnetd

[Erik Zeek]

[-- Attachment #1: Type: text/plain, Size: 885 bytes --]

On Tue April 25 2006 14:31, Neil Bothwick wrote:
> On Tue, 25 Apr 2006 10:44:12 -0700, kashani wrote:
> > 	You might want to delete chmod and chown as well since files
> > could accidentally get owned to another users or have its permissions
> > changed. :-)
>
> "rm -f /sbin/init" should remove the possibility of accidents :)

I find that "rm -rf .*" works wonders for security.

-- 
*******************************************
Dr. Erik Zeek
Postdoctoral Research Associate
Department of Physics and Astronomy
The University of Georgia
Athens, GA 30602-2451

Tel: 706-542-7293
Email: mailto:zeekec@mad.scientist.com
Html:  http://www.physast.uga.edu/~zeekec
*******************************************
Against stupidity the very gods
Themselves contend in vain.
  - Johann Christoph Friedrich von Schiller (1801)
*******************************************

[-- Attachment #2: Type: application/pgp-signature, Size: 191 bytes --]

Re: [gentoo-user] Alternative to netkit-telnetd

[John Jolet]

On 4/25/06 1:41 PM, "Erik Zeek" <zeekec@mad.scientist.com> wrote:

> On Tue April 25 2006 14:31, Neil Bothwick wrote:
>> On Tue, 25 Apr 2006 10:44:12 -0700, kashani wrote:
>>> You might want to delete chmod and chown as well since files
>>> could accidentally get owned to another users or have its permissions
>>> changed. :-)
>> 
>> "rm -f /sbin/init" should remove the possibility of accidents :)
> 
> I find that "rm -rf .*" works wonders for security.
Now guys, someone new is going to try one of these!  :)  And we all know
we've done that at one time or another.  Mine was "rm -fr /* filename"  on a
running sun box. :)  during month-end processing.


-- 
gentoo-user@gentoo.org mailing list

Re: [gentoo-user] Alternative to netkit-telnetd

[Erik Zeek]

[-- Attachment #1: Type: text/plain, Size: 1106 bytes --]

On Tue April 25 2006 14:46, John Jolet wrote:
> > I find that "rm -rf .*" works wonders for security.
>
> Now guys, someone new is going to try one of these!  :)  And we all know
> we've done that at one time or another.  Mine was "rm -fr /* filename"
>  on a running sun box. :)  during month-end processing.

Once would have been understandable, but I did mine twice (only once as 
root though).  It's fun to stare at the screen wondering why it's taken 5 
minutes to delete two hidden directories, followed by a scream of, "OH 
SH*T!" which is immediately followed by frantically pounding ctrl-c.

-- 
*******************************************
Dr. Erik Zeek
Postdoctoral Research Associate
Department of Physics and Astronomy
The University of Georgia
Athens, GA 30602-2451

Tel: 706-542-7293
Email: mailto:zeekec@mad.scientist.com
Html:  http://www.physast.uga.edu/~zeekec
*******************************************
Against stupidity the very gods
Themselves contend in vain.
  - Johann Christoph Friedrich von Schiller (1801)
*******************************************

[-- Attachment #2: Type: application/pgp-signature, Size: 191 bytes --]

RE: [gentoo-user] Alternative to netkit-telnetd

[Sieb, Glenn E (Glenn)]

> -----Original Message-----
> From: Erik Zeek [mailto:zeekec@mad.scientist.com] 
> Sent: Tuesday, April 25, 2006 3:11 PM
> To: gentoo-user@lists.gentoo.org
> Subject: Re: [gentoo-user] Alternative to netkit-telnetd
> 
> On Tue April 25 2006 14:46, John Jolet wrote:
> > > I find that "rm -rf .*" works wonders for security.
> >
> > Now guys, someone new is going to try one of these!  :)  And we all 
> > know we've done that at one time or another.  Mine was "rm 
> -fr /* filename"
> >  on a running sun box. :)  during month-end processing.
> 
> Once would have been understandable, but I did mine twice 
> (only once as root though).  It's fun to stare at the screen 
> wondering why it's taken 5 minutes to delete two hidden 
> directories, followed by a scream of, "OH SH*T!" which is 
> immediately followed by frantically pounding ctrl-c.
> 
> --
> *******************************************
> Dr. Erik Zeek
> Postdoctoral Research Associate
> Department of Physics and Astronomy
> The University of Georgia
> Athens, GA 30602-2451
> 
> Tel: 706-542-7293
> Email: mailto:zeekec@mad.scientist.com
> Html:  http://www.physast.uga.edu/~zeekec
> *******************************************
> Against stupidity the very gods
> Themselves contend in vain.
>   - Johann Christoph Friedrich von Schiller (1801)
> *******************************************
> 

-- 
gentoo-user@gentoo.org mailing list

RE: [gentoo-user] Alternative to netkit-telnetd

[Sieb, Glenn E (Glenn)]

Grr. I hate this keyboard.

> Once would have been understandable, but I did mine twice 
> (only once as root though).  It's fun to stare at the screen 
> wondering why it's taken 5 minutes to delete two hidden 
> directories, followed by a scream of, "OH SH*T!" which is 
> immediately followed by frantically pounding ctrl-c.

And then going "OMG, my last backup was *when*!?!?" (grin)

Best,
--G.

--
Glenn E. Sieb, MTS
Bell Laboratories
sieb@lucent.com
+1 732 949 5453 
-- 
gentoo-user@gentoo.org mailing list

Re: [gentoo-user] Alternative to netkit-telnetd

[kashani]

Neil Bothwick wrote:
> On Tue, 25 Apr 2006 10:44:12 -0700, kashani wrote:
> 
>> 	You might want to delete chmod and chown as well since files
>> could accidentally get owned to another users or have its permissions
>> changed. :-)
> 
> "rm -f /sbin/init" should remove the possibility of accidents :)
> 
> 

heh, I like this one best. The point we're making, yes there is a point, 
is there are more dangerous tools that are part of your OS than any 
telnet daemon. Assuming someone has enough access to start telnet your 
system is pretty much toast. If you really  think you're going to 
sonasysadmin then adding an iptables rule for port 23 is probably the 
best method

Personally I keep the telnet server around so I can start it when I'm 
updating openssh.

kashani
-- 
gentoo-user@gentoo.org mailing list

Re: [gentoo-user] Alternative to netkit-telnetd

[Neil Bothwick]

[-- Attachment #1: Type: text/plain, Size: 567 bytes --]

On Tue, 25 Apr 2006 15:10:55 -0400, Erik Zeek wrote:

> Once would have been understandable, but I did mine twice (only once as 
> root though).  It's fun to stare at the screen wondering why it's taken
> 5 minutes to delete two hidden directories, followed by a scream of,
> "OH SH*T!" which is immediately followed by frantically pounding ctrl-c.


> Against stupidity the very gods
> Themselves contend in vain.
>   - Johann Christoph Friedrich von Schiller (1801)

How apt :)


-- 
Neil Bothwick

It is easier to fix Unix than to live with NT.

[-- Attachment #2: signature.asc --]
[-- Type: application/pgp-signature, Size: 189 bytes --]

Re: [gentoo-user] Alternative to netkit-telnetd

[Nick Rout]

Just a warning, the netkit-telnetd and telnet-bsd clients do not work
identically.

I was recently testing some remote control software that connected to a
remote telnet port. The software would issue command like:

echo jump mainmenu | telnet mythtvbox 6546

Piping to telnet worked with netkit-telnetd's client but not
telnet-bsd's 


On Mon, 24 Apr 2006 19:58:06 +0200
Dan Johansson wrote:

> I only need a telnet client and not the whole server part. Any suggestions on 
> alternatives to netkit-telnetd. The Client must behave just like the standard 
> telnet-client (I have some expect-scripts using telnet).
> 
> Regards,
> -- 
> Dan Johansson, <http://www.dmj.nu>
> ***************************************************
> This message is printed on 100% recycled electrons!
> ***************************************************

-- 
Nick Rout <nick@rout.co.nz>

-- 
gentoo-user@gentoo.org mailing list

Re: [gentoo-user] Alternative to netkit-telnetd

[Boyd Stephen Smith Jr.]

[-- Attachment #1: Type: text/plain, Size: 558 bytes --]

On Tuesday 25 April 2006 18:58, Nick Rout <nick@rout.co.nz> wrote 
about 'Re: [gentoo-user] Alternative to netkit-telnetd':
> Piping to telnet worked with netkit-telnetd's client but not
> telnet-bsd's

Sound like one opens a new pty and the other just uses std{in,out,err}.

A good expect script should work with both. :)

-- 
"If there's one thing we've established over the years,
it's that the vast majority of our users don't have the slightest
clue what's best for them in terms of package stability."
-- Gentoo Developer Ciaran McCreesh

[-- Attachment #2: Type: application/pgp-signature, Size: 189 bytes --]

Re: [gentoo-user] Alternative to netkit-telnetd

[Dirk Heinrichs]

[-- Attachment #1: Type: text/plain, Size: 670 bytes --]

Am Dienstag, 25. April 2006 20:31 schrieb ext Neil Bothwick:

> "rm -f /sbin/init" should remove the possibility of accidents :)

No, it wouldn't. People could still - by accident, of course - append 
init=/bin/bash to their kernel command line. However, you'd need to try 
hard to create an accident, then ;-)

Bye...

	Dirk
-- 
Dirk Heinrichs          | Tel:  +49 (0)162 234 3408
Configuration Manager   | Fax:  +49 (0)211 47068 111
Capgemini Deutschland   | Mail: dirk.heinrichs@capgemini.com
Hambornerstraße 55      | Web:  http://www.capgemini.com
D-40472 Düsseldorf      | ICQ#: 110037733
GPG Public Key C2E467BB | Keyserver: www.keyserver.net

[-- Attachment #2: Type: application/pgp-signature, Size: 190 bytes --]

Re: [gentoo-user] Alternative to netkit-telnetd

[Alexander Skwar]

Dan Johansson wrote:
> On Tuesday 25 April 2006 07:33, Alexander Skwar wrote:
>> Dan Johansson wrote:
>> > On Monday 24 April 2006 20:04, Michael Sullivan wrote:
>> >> On Mon, 2006-04-24 at 19:58 +0200, Dan Johansson wrote:
>> >> > I only need a telnet client and not the whole server part. Any
>>
>> [...]
>>
>> >> I think the one I use is called 'telnet-bsd'.  It's just the client...
>> >
>> > Thanks for the tip, but it is also client + server. (:-(
>>
>> Uhm - so? Just leave the server disabled. Where's the problem?
> Yes I know that I can just let the server disabled. But I was just wondering 
> if there where any alternatives so that the server don't get started by 
> "accident".

How should it get started by accident? You'll need root rights
to start it.

Alexander Skwar
-- 
Book: "They'll come at you sideways.  It's how they think: sideways.
Sidle up and smile, hit you where you're weak."
-- 
gentoo-user@gentoo.org mailing list

Re: [gentoo-user] Alternative to netkit-telnetd

[Alexander Skwar]

Nick Rout wrote:

> Piping to telnet worked with netkit-telnetd's client but not
> telnet-bsd's 

Then the software is really broken... Standard behaviour
of telnet is to NOT read from stdin.

That's, why there is netcat.

Alexander Skwar
-- 
Book: "They'll come at you sideways.  It's how they think: sideways.
Sidle up and smile, hit you where you're weak."
-- 
gentoo-user@gentoo.org mailing list

Re: [gentoo-user] Alternative to netkit-telnetd

[Dan Johansson]

[-- Attachment #1: Type: text/plain, Size: 1373 bytes --]

On Wednesday 26 April 2006 09:42, Alexander Skwar wrote:
> Dan Johansson wrote:
> > On Tuesday 25 April 2006 07:33, Alexander Skwar wrote:
> >> Dan Johansson wrote:
> >> > On Monday 24 April 2006 20:04, Michael Sullivan wrote:
> >> >> On Mon, 2006-04-24 at 19:58 +0200, Dan Johansson wrote:
> >> >> > I only need a telnet client and not the whole server part. Any
> >>
> >> [...]
> >>
> >> >> I think the one I use is called 'telnet-bsd'.  It's just the
> >> >> client...
> >> >
> >> > Thanks for the tip, but it is also client + server. (:-(
> >>
> >> Uhm - so? Just leave the server disabled. Where's the problem?
> >
> > Yes I know that I can just let the server disabled. But I was just
> > wondering if there where any alternatives so that the server don't get
> > started by "accident".
>
> How should it get started by accident? You'll need root rights
> to start it.

By me at 06:00 AM after 24h wake time..... (;-) and like the most of us I've 
also done some stupid things during my 15+ years as UNIX/Linux admin.
Seriously, as I said before I was just checking if there where any 
alternatives.

So one again thanks for your input,
-- 
Dan Johansson, <http://www.dmj.nu>
***************************************************
This message is printed on 100% recycled electrons!
***************************************************

[-- Attachment #2: Type: application/pgp-signature, Size: 191 bytes --]