Re: git: 24e1824e4646 - main - Deprecate telnet daemon
Date: Wed, 21 Sep 2022 21:57:47 UTC
On Wed, Sep 21, 2022 at 02:55:36PM -0700, Cy Schubert wrote: > In message <20220921214546.426y6o4jpnsfsa2l@mutt-hbsd>, Shawn Webb writes: > > > > > > On Wed, Sep 21, 2022 at 02:11:44PM -0700, Gleb Smirnoff wrote: > > > Mike, > > >=20 > > > On Wed, Sep 21, 2022 at 01:02:17PM -0500, Mike Karels wrote: > > > M> I have no problem with deprecating (or removing) telnetd in base. I > > > M> think the client should remain, though. I use it frequently, although > > > M> not on the telnet port. ftp* are another issue; anonymous FTP is a > > > M> perfectly reasonable usage. I use it to download FreeBSD images often. > > >=20 > > > Is there any service where telnet to a port would be preferred over nc(1)? > > > > I wonder if it would be worthwhile to hardlink telnet(1) to nc(1). > > No. Though nc -t is supposed to be compatible with telnet, it is not. No > sense fooling people into thinking nc, even with the -t argument, is the > same as telnet. It is not and it will be the source of many PRs which will > eventually waste developer's time making nc behave just like telnet does. > It is better to simply move it to ports for those who absolutely need it. Good points. Thanks for the info! -- Shawn Webb Cofounder / Security Engineer HardenedBSD https://git.hardenedbsd.org/hardenedbsd/pubkeys/-/raw/master/Shawn_Webb/03A4CBEBB82EA5A67D9F3853FF2E67A277F8E1FA.pub.asc