home
***
CD-ROM
|
disk
|
FTP
|
other
***
search
/
kermit.columbia.edu
/
kermit.columbia.edu.tar
/
kermit.columbia.edu
/
newsgroups
/
misc.20010306-20010921
/
000396_fdc@watsun.cc.columbia.edu_Wed Sep 19 12:21:02 EDT 2001.msg
< prev
next >
Wrap
Text File
|
2001-09-20
|
3KB
|
64 lines
Article: 12796 of comp.protocols.kermit.misc
Path: newsmaster.cc.columbia.edu!watsun.cc.columbia.edu!fdc
From: fdc@watsun.cc.columbia.edu (Frank da Cruz)
Newsgroups: comp.std.internat,comp.terminals,comp.protocols.kermit.misc
Subject: Re: Unicode/UTF-8 terminal emulators
Date: 19 Sep 2001 16:20:26 GMT
Organization: Columbia University
Lines: 47
Message-ID: <9oagka$cco$1@newsmaster.cc.columbia.edu>
References: <9n37gi$51n5h$1@ID-81209.news.dfncis.de> <9o7qme$6l8$1@pegasus.csx.cam.ac.uk> <9o8gul$biplh$1@ID-81209.news.dfncis.de> <9o9n66$osb$2@pegasus.csx.cam.ac.uk>
NNTP-Posting-Host: watsun.cc.columbia.edu
X-Trace: newsmaster.cc.columbia.edu 1000916426 12696 128.59.39.2 (19 Sep 2001 16:20:26 GMT)
X-Complaints-To: postmaster@columbia.edu
NNTP-Posting-Date: 19 Sep 2001 16:20:26 GMT
Xref: newsmaster.cc.columbia.edu comp.std.internat:9464 comp.terminals:16536 comp.protocols.kermit.misc:12796
In article <9o9n66$osb$2@pegasus.csx.cam.ac.uk>,
Markus Kuhn <mgk25@cl.cam.ac.uk> wrote:
: "Konstantinos Kostis" <kosta@kostis.de> writes:
: >> Most of which are terminal emulators using software such
: >> as Kermit (has supported UTF-8 for two years now!), not actual
: >> terminals with microcontroller firmware.
: >
: >Interesting. So it's acutally easy now?
:
: Yes. The single most widely used VT100 terminal emulator to log from
: a Win32 machine into a Unix box today is Simon Tatham's PuTTY, a
: freely available SSH client, which also had UTF-8 support for quite
: some time. For security reasons, practically all decent Unix system
: administrators have disabled both telnet and rlogin/rsh on their
: machines during the past 2-4 years, and ssh is today the only
: widely enabled remote terminal login protocol for Unix.
:
: http://www.chiark.greenend.org.uk/~sgtatham/putty/
: http://www.cl.cam.ac.uk/~mgk25/unicode.html
:
That may or may not be true, but if it is, it is only through ignorance
or laziness. Secure Telnet clients and servers are available that use
IETF-approved security methods such as Kerberos IV, Kerberos V, and
SSL/TLS that are far more manageable and disaster-recoverable than SSH.
Some are listed here:
http://www.columbia.edu/kermit/telnetd.html
Among the clients, Kermit 95 for Windows NT/2000/XP supports UTF-8, and
the next release of Kermit 95 will also support UTF-8 for Windows 95/98/ME.
You can read about Kermit 95 and download a trial version here:
http://www.columbia.edu/kermit/k95.html
The next version of Kermit 95 will also support SSH V1 and V2, not because
we think SSH V1 is a good idea, but only because so many short-sighted or
misinformed Unix system administrators have made it requirement to access
their servers. The problem with SSH V1, in a nutshell, is that the key
files are sitting wide open on the (insecure) Windows disk, waiting to be
harvested and cracked offline. Once cracked, the key file gives immediate
access to all the victim's hosts, with no way to recover.
The reason SSH V1 is so popular is that it's easy to install and manage,
compared to a true, centralized, manageable system like Kerberos, and that
it's "better than nothing". Easy security is not secure.
- Frank