Re: National security backdoor.
From: Nick Maclaren (nmm1_at_cus.cam.ac.uk)
Date: 04/06/04
- Previous message: david20_at_alpha1.mdx.ac.uk: "Re: National security backdoor."
- In reply to: david20_at_alpha1.mdx.ac.uk: "Re: National security backdoor."
- Next in thread: Ion-Mihai Tetcu: "** Troll ** Re: National security backdoor."
- Messages sorted by: [ date ] [ thread ] [ subject ] [ author ] [ attachment ]
Date: 6 Apr 2004 15:29:55 GMT
In article <c4ugqr$rvu$1@news.mdx.ac.uk>,
david20@alpha1.mdx.ac.uk writes:
|> In article <okh9k1-592.ln1@parsys.cs.uic.edu>, "Jon A. Solworth" <solworth@RemoveThisNow.cs.uic.edu> writes:
|>
|> >Not to mention (well, I'm going to mention it), nobody uses telnet
|> >anymore.
|>
|> Maybe in 5 to 10 years time that statement will be true.
|> But at the moment the number of machines running Telnet and ftp (both of which
|> send passwords in clear text) far exceeds the number running ssh and sftp.
|>
|> What you probably meant was that nobody should be using Telnet if they can
|> avoid it. The problem being that you only control your own machines not all the
|> machines you may need to access or transfer files to outside of your
|> organisation.
It's not the only problem. Quite a lot of control devices, even
on new systems, have only a telnet interface. There is also the
requirement for FTP and TFTP (worse than FTP!) for booting and font
serving on some systems.
Such interfaces should obviously be as well isolated as possible,
and with no untrusted machines on the same network. Easier said
than done :-(
Regards,
Nick Maclaren.
- Previous message: david20_at_alpha1.mdx.ac.uk: "Re: National security backdoor."
- In reply to: david20_at_alpha1.mdx.ac.uk: "Re: National security backdoor."
- Next in thread: Ion-Mihai Tetcu: "** Troll ** Re: National security backdoor."
- Messages sorted by: [ date ] [ thread ] [ subject ] [ author ] [ attachment ]
Relevant Pages
|
