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" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> To: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>; <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> 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. >
