3 ms·

I'm pretty sure openbsd is fine, since they removed telnetd from the OS years ago. The big question is, why do other systems still have a telnetd?

• joshAg 15y ago
  same reason there are still Cobol jobs. Users, for various reasons (ranging from dubious to valid), refuse to update to a more modern solution.
  • ajross 15y ago
    Telnet is still quite common in the embedded world. Existing tool boxes have implementations, busybox has a telnet client and daemon built-in, etc... It's easy. If the box never goes beyond a development rack it's safe. And if it's what you've been doing for 15 years there's not a lot of value in change.
  • SomeOtherGuy 15y ago
    Nonsense. People stick with telnet because of ignorance. That is why you remove telnetd, and force them to update. There is no difficulty in switching, and thus no valid reason not to switch.
    • forgotusername 15y ago
      As an example, there are entire classes of embedded platforms that support networking but barely have enough RAM even for the IP stack. Is it really sensible to add $10 to the cost of a temperature sensor just so it has enough RAM and CPU to handle SSH?
      • koenigdavidmj 15y ago
        This is the piece that allows you to telnet /into/ a new shiny FreeBSD box, for which there are no legitimate uses in 2011. If they take this bit out, you can still telnet out to your embedded hardware, L2 switches, and the like.