IETF Logo Mail Archive

Re: Telnet and FTP to Historic

Joe Touch <touch@strayalpha.com> Thu, 03 December 2020 15:11 UTC

Return-Path: <touch@strayalpha.com>
X-Original-To: ietf@ietfa.amsl.com
Delivered-To: ietf@ietfa.amsl.com
Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id C3DEB3A0D99 for <ietf@ietfa.amsl.com>; Thu, 3 Dec 2020 07:11:52 -0800 (PST)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -1.319
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-1.319 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, DKIM_SIGNED=0.1, DKIM_VALID=-0.1, DKIM_VALID_AU=-0.1, DKIM_VALID_EF=-0.1, SPF_HELO_NONE=0.001, SPF_NEUTRAL=0.779, URIBL_BLOCKED=0.001] autolearn=no autolearn_force=no
Authentication-Results: ietfa.amsl.com (amavisd-new); dkim=pass (2048-bit key) header.d=strayalpha.com
Received: from mail.ietf.org ([4.31.198.44]) by localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id cB7-QVgRzr0z for <ietf@ietfa.amsl.com>; Thu, 3 Dec 2020 07:11:51 -0800 (PST)
Received: from server217-4.web-hosting.com (server217-4.web-hosting.com [198.54.116.98]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 60BBC3A0D8A for <ietf@ietf.org>; Thu, 3 Dec 2020 07:11:51 -0800 (PST)
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; q=dns/txt; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=strayalpha.com; s=default; h=To:References:Message-Id:Cc:Date:In-Reply-To: From:Subject:Mime-Version:Content-Transfer-Encoding:Content-Type:Sender: Reply-To:Content-ID:Content-Description:Resent-Date:Resent-From:Resent-Sender :Resent-To:Resent-Cc:Resent-Message-ID:List-Id:List-Help:List-Unsubscribe: List-Subscribe:List-Post:List-Owner:List-Archive; bh=1iXGdGvLKxQhhJ9rrZlwLHwiK2xfGkj/9a4LlVsqiXo=; b=7DfDnsKzjpYnPm1pQpDCu+WwIM CEku2f2B80gy1csu6Fgr3q3QhXUE2jAqWL3E+37GIenJQOTGc/qlK2pEumg1pSWUlWH2iMmVGj9x8 8YzxiZ1kz1rAWHsFWysnYqPbQaf0c/5JrgYS8r8wxXtYrwpZWC3bcC0O4OAbXZh0zo8bchOur5k2g hZ5JZ2miDEFNsksxXew5uKr3Zqdq4p1qd70bhBB4bJBU+horRYDj/UOW9QJ12DuE2n6IBx13xaSlN k5PkemlpkRO6K86RjAlHBlGOCRQlv8gEHFsodctQymSaRA2dJpbSZjM0maeEIqbFnwggqxmkg0ZWz nftBHG+Q==;
Received: from cpe-172-250-225-198.socal.res.rr.com ([172.250.225.198]:60839 helo=[192.168.1.13]) by server217.web-hosting.com with esmtpsa (TLS1.2) tls TLS_ECDHE_RSA_WITH_AES_256_GCM_SHA384 (Exim 4.93) (envelope-from <touch@strayalpha.com>) id 1kkqGk-002uR7-CZ; Thu, 03 Dec 2020 10:11:47 -0500
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="utf-8"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
Mime-Version: 1.0 (1.0)
Subject: Re: Telnet and FTP to Historic
From: Joe Touch <touch@strayalpha.com>
In-Reply-To: <51d208a3-4cae-b69a-6ecc-d15f48c66b44@huitema.net>
Date: Thu, 03 Dec 2020 07:11:41 -0800
Cc: Mark Andrews <marka@isc.org>, Stephen Farrell <stephen.farrell@cs.tcd.ie>, "John C. Klensin" <john-ietf@jck.com>, Michael Richardson <mcr+ietf@sandelman.ca>, Carsten Bormann <cabo@tzi.org>, Phillip Hallam-Baker <phill@hallambaker.com>, IETF Discussion Mailing List <ietf@ietf.org>
Message-Id: <06E7EB62-D6C2-4827-A241-8E276860C2B7@strayalpha.com>
References: <51d208a3-4cae-b69a-6ecc-d15f48c66b44@huitema.net>
To: Christian Huitema <huitema@huitema.net>
X-Mailer: iPad Mail (18B92)
X-OutGoing-Spam-Status: No, score=-1.0
X-AntiAbuse: This header was added to track abuse, please include it with any abuse report
X-AntiAbuse: Primary Hostname - server217.web-hosting.com
X-AntiAbuse: Original Domain - ietf.org
X-AntiAbuse: Originator/Caller UID/GID - [47 12] / [47 12]
X-AntiAbuse: Sender Address Domain - strayalpha.com
X-Get-Message-Sender-Via: server217.web-hosting.com: authenticated_id: touch@strayalpha.com
X-Authenticated-Sender: server217.web-hosting.com: touch@strayalpha.com
X-Source:
X-Source-Args:
X-Source-Dir:
X-From-Rewrite: unmodified, already matched
Archived-At: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/ietf/IkjOFxvpG1_LmRtqQ9wC1xv5Hig>
X-BeenThere: ietf@ietf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.29
Precedence: list
List-Id: IETF-Discussion <ietf.ietf.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/options/ietf>, <mailto:ietf-request@ietf.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/browse/ietf/>
List-Post: <mailto:ietf@ietf.org>
List-Help: <mailto:ietf-request@ietf.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ietf>, <mailto:ietf-request@ietf.org?subject=subscribe>
X-List-Received-Date: Thu, 03 Dec 2020 15:11:53 -0000

N

> On Dec 2, 2020, at 11:50 PM, Christian Huitema <huitema@huitema.net> wrote:
> 
> 
>> On 12/2/2020 11:22 PM, Joe Touch wrote:
>> 
>>>> On Dec 2, 2020, at 10:47 PM, Christian Huitema <huitema@huitema.net> wrote:
>>> 
>>> Mark, you had me until "home network". Because most home networks are in fact *not* more secure than the open Internet
>> Not that I like NATs, but they do afford protection beyond being on the open Internet simply by lacking incoming port mapping.
> 
> That's the firewall illusion. It is shattered if someone inside the wall falls for a phishing attack, or clicks on the wrong attachment, or downloads the wrong program. At which point all these unsafe programs that are used "only behind the firewall" become nice avenues for quickly spreading the attack much farther than the initial failure. See numerous examples of ransomware attacks against small businesses, schools, etc.
> 
> -- Christian Huitema

Sure, but you have to attack the machines behind a firewall some other way *first*. 

I didn’t say they were safe, just safe*er*.

Joe

v2.23.0 | Report a Bug | By Email