Re: Telnet vs PcAnywhere

["a.berreby" <fastjoey () wanadoo fr>]

3)telnet should be replaced by SSH ALWAYS <--- there is no reason to use
TELNET, unless managing an older device, that supports telnet exclusively --
in that case telnet should be used over a VPN.

> definitely

4)the amount on incompetence among people calling themselves "network
professionals" , etc. makes me worried, as well as lack of initiative in
research. Don't trust what we will tell you here in blind faith - Google,
read the specs, and try things out.

> agreed

@Lx
----- Original Message -----
From: "Igor D. Spivak" <urbanachiever () attbi com>
To: <tonylindseyt () excite com>; <security-basics () securityfocus com>
Sent: Friday, March 07, 2003 8:10 PM
Subject: Re: Telnet vs PcAnywhere


> 1)Neither telnet nor PC Anywhere fall under the definition of a VPN <---
> virtual private network
>
> 2)Telnet should not be used to grant access from the UNTRUSTED to the
> TRUSTED network (internet to lan for example). Telnet sends all
information
> in clear text. PC Anywhere is more secure, as it allows for encryption,
but
> its not recommended.
>
> 3)telnet should be replaced by SSH ALWAYS <--- there is no reason to use
> TELNET, unless managing an older device, that supports telnet
exclusively --
> in that case telnet should be used over a VPN.
>
> 4)the amount on incompetence among people calling themselves "network
> professionals" , etc. makes me worried, as well as lack of initiative in
> research. Don't trust what we will tell you here in blind faith - Google,
> read the specs, and try things out.
>
> just my 0.25 cents.
>
> ids
>
>
>
> > Folks,
> >
> > What is the difference in security protection/features between granting
an
> outside vendor VPN access using TELNET versus using PCANYWHERE?  Some of
our
> vendors need vpn access to their servers inside our network..and I have
seen
> the firewall rules set up both ways.