Netkit

Craig M. Reece shade at jetcity.com
Mon Sep 25 14:53:36 PDT 2000


Still, there are better options out there. For instance I use OpenSSH rather
than telnet (ug) and ncFTP rather than the totally anemic ftp in the
netkit-combo.

> -----Original Message-----
> From: lfs-discuss-owner at linuxfromscratch.org
> [mailto:lfs-discuss-owner at linuxfromscratch.org]On Behalf Of Michael
> Irving
> Sent: Monday, September 25, 2000 5:30 PM
> To: lfs-discuss at linuxfromscratch.org
> Subject: RE: Netkit
>
>
> Netkit-combo isn't really a sec breach. It doesn't AFAIK
> install any deamons
> that start up without you adding them to the scripts in
> /etc/init.d.. There
> might be some root exploits on  them but that isn't the issue
> I think. I
> hardly think there is any root exploits that isn't fixed as
> as discovered
> and any users you have on yer system shouldn't be allowed to
> run daemons
> anyhow because that is a security breach in it self. If you
> consider twice
> what you put into your bootscripts before you actually do it
> then you should
> be pretty safe. A linux box running without any daemons at
> all is as safe as
> you'll get. It isn't the daemons I was after. I was actually
> out for the
> connectivity utils in it.
>
> Michael
>
> > -----Original Message-----
> > From: lfs-discuss-owner at linuxfromscratch.org
> > [mailto:lfs-discuss-owner at linuxfromscratch.org]On Behalf Of
> Kyle West
> > Sent: 25. september 2000 23:24
> > To: lfs-discuss at linuxfromscratch.org
> > Subject: Re: Netkit
> >
> >
> > One reason I would throw out for this not to be standard is
> because first
> > and foremost, it's a security hole.  Given that it was the
> first thing I
> > installed by myself after installing the base LFS kit,
> since it's mighty
> > useful.. But it could quite conceivably be the difference between
> > a hacker
> > getting in or not, and IMHO shouldn't be standard on any system
> > without the
> > user/administrator explicitly knowing the risks.  This is,
> in fact, the
> > exact reason I chose not to go with a pre-made distribution such
> > as redhat.
> > There are so many little extras in there that are security
> > breaches that it
> > just wasn't worth it to me to try tracking them all down.
> >
> > What I'd be interested in knowing is what happened to the additional
> > software info?  I have accessed the linuxdoc.org page several
> > times in the
> > last couple weeks because they have LFS 2.2, with
> additional networking
> > info, X and window manager installation..  Is it going to be
> > coming back in
> > a future version, or would it be a viable project for someone
> > besides Gerard
> > (any volunteers?  perhaps I would do it...) to start up a 2nd
> > how-to to add
> > goodies to an LFS install?  I realize that a lot of how-to's are
> > already out
> > there for misc software, but in my own attempts at
> customizing LFS, there
> > doesn't seem to be a very comprehensive one-place document.
>  Just finding
> > out what a window manager was took me several hours of surfing.
> >
> >
> > >From: "Michael Irving" <laric at laric.com>
> > >Reply-To: lfs-discuss at linuxfromscratch.org
> > >To: "Lfs-Discuss" <lfs-discuss at linuxfromscratch.org>
> > >Subject: Netkit
> > >Date: Mon, 25 Sep 2000 23:05:30 +0200
> > >MIME-Version: 1.0
> > >Received: from [216.29.174.31] by hotmail.com (3.2) with ESMTP id
> > >MHotMailBB99092B002740042A16D81DAE1F09BA0; Mon Sep 25 14:05:48 2000
> > >Received: from shadowfax (localhost.localdomain [127.0.0.1])by
> > >shadowfax.linuxfromscratch.org (Postfix) with ESMTPid
> > 9C86936F4A; Mon, 25
> > >Sep 2000 17:06:56 -0400 (EDT)
> > >Received: with LISTAR (v0.129a; list lfs-discuss); Mon, 25 Sep 2000
> > >17:06:56 -0400 (EDT)
> > >Received: from daemon.norgros.no (daemon.norgros.no
> [193.69.136.72])by
> > >shadowfax.linuxfromscratch.org (Postfix) with SMTP id 3D85C36E4Cfor
> > ><lfs-discuss at linuxfromscratch.org>; Mon, 25 Sep 2000
> 17:06:55 -0400 (EDT)
> > >Received: (qmail 29067 invoked from network); 25 Sep 2000
> 21:02:46 -0000
> > >Received: from i.really.am.laric.com (HELO laricath)
> > (195.159.103.178)  by
> > >daemon.norgros.no with SMTP; 25 Sep 2000 21:02:46 -0000
> > >From lfs-discuss-owner at linuxfromscratch.org Mon Sep 25
> 14:08:44 2000
> > >Message-ID: <EAEFKMMDJEGMLBDDNGFKMEKOCBAA.laric at laric.com>
> > >X-Priority: 3 (Normal)
> > >X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
> > >X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook IMO, Build 9.0.2416 (9.0.2910.0)
> > >Importance: Normal
> > >X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V5.50.4133.2400
> > >Sender: lfs-discuss-owner at linuxfromscratch.org
> > >Errors-To: lfs-discuss-owner at linuxfromscratch.org
> > >X-original-sender: laric at laric.com
> > >Precedence: bulk
> > >
> > >Why does lfs suggest netkit-base instead of netkit-combo. To be
> > able to use
> > >the network you need a few commands to even get more
> software. I would
> > >suggest that in the next version you change to
> netkit-combo where you get
> > >telnet and ftp and such immediatly and without generating
> any problems
> > >AFAIK. This would help alot when you go out to get more software
> > to use on
> > >yer newly compiled LFS.
> > >
> > >This is all IMHO.
> > >
> > >
> > >Michael
> > >
> > >
> > >
> >
> >
> ______________________________________________________________
> ___________
> > Get Your Private, Free E-mail from MSN Hotmail at
http://www.hotmail.com.
>
> Share information about yourself, create your own public profile at
> http://profiles.msn.com.
>
>
>
>







More information about the lfs-dev mailing list