Re: (PM) Feature Request (was SECURITY PROBLEM.)

John Nowack (john@tremont.dpc.net)
Thu, 9 Jul 1998 14:26:09 -0500

Messages sorted by: [ date ][ thread ][ subject ][ author ]
Next message: Josh Richards: "Re: (PM)droping"
Previous message: Josh Richards: "RE: (PM) 3.8b17 conclusions (User = @!])"
Maybe in reply to: Christopher X. Candreva: "(PM) Feature Request (was SECURITY PROBLEM.)"

>users from another country cannot teleport into my office, unlike a
>network user sho can telnet into my network. A more fair compare would be
Not that I want to perpetuate this argument (I agree that it would be
nice that if it didn't work like this, but I know about it and can work
around it), but you *do* have inbound telnet blocked at the border routers
for hosts that do not *need* to have inbound telnets, yes? Now you only
have to worry about your local users, and that can be solved with filters
on the dial-ins.

John

--
John Nowack
john@dpc.net
DPConsultants, Inc.
Sys Admin -- dpc.net
309-925-2451
-
To unsubscribe, email 'majordomo@livingston.com' with
'unsubscribe portmaster-users' in the body of the message.
Searchable list archive: <URL:http://www.livingston.com/Tech/archive/>

Next message: Josh Richards: "Re: (PM)droping"
Previous message: Josh Richards: "RE: (PM) 3.8b17 conclusions (User = @!])"
Maybe in reply to: Christopher X. Candreva: "(PM) Feature Request (was SECURITY PROBLEM.)"