Date: Sat, 16 Sep 2000 08:33:17 -0700 From: Cy Schubert - ITSD Open Systems Group <Cy.Schubert@uumail.gov.bc.ca> To: Mark Murray <mark@grondar.za> Cc: Will Andrews <will@physics.purdue.edu>, arch@FreeBSD.ORG Subject: Re: Rsh/Rlogin/Rcmd & friends Message-ID: <200009161534.e8GFYDc32614@cwsys.cwsent.com> In-Reply-To: Your message of "Sat, 16 Sep 2000 09:11:43 %2B0200." <200009160711.e8G7Bjn05695@grimreaper.grondar.za>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
In message <200009160711.e8G7Bjn05695@grimreaper.grondar.za>, Mark
Murray write
s:
> > Ok people. I want a reason why we shouldn't move rsh/rlogin/rcmd out of
> > the base system and into ports, now that we can support SSH connections
> > out of the box.
>
> You have my vote!
>
> I am of the opinion that thew r-utils should be lead outside and
> subjected to the bullet-in-the-back-of-the-head style of justice
> as meted out by certain small governments.
It's obvious from the comments I've seen on this list, the comments
I've received privately, your comment, and my own comment from
yesterday, which by the way sparked a number of negative comments
against me personally, that this has become an emotional issue, maybe
even a religious issue.
I must admit the mistake I made was not to offer a single technical
reason for my vote. Looking back at the comments made over the last 24
hours, the majority of the votes made the same mistake.
Being IMO a reasonable person -- hey I'm not a jerk all the time,
believe me -- :) -- I would like to change my vote, as I've been
convinced by those with clearer heads than mine.
Even though I've changed my vote in regards to this subject, I do think
we can offer a compromise if everyone is willing to step back and look
at the bigger picture (sorry, I wasn't looking at the bigger picture --
definitely not management material yesterday). If there is a
significant number of people who want this we might be able to put
together a port (and I'll volunteer to do it) that will:
1. Remove telent, ftp, and "r" services from inetd.conf, by commenting
them
out so when the port is deinstalled, the services re-apper.
2. The port would create an mtree file (not replace any existing) that
would change the permissions of the telnet, ftp, and "r" commands
daemon
binaries and client binaries.
Those interested in removing the said services would then install the
port after
every FreeBSD upgrade or make installworld.
Now for the vote. As per the rule of argument, I will offer at least
three options:
1. Will Andrews' initial proposal.
2. The compromise port just described above.
3. A simple script disable the appropriate services in inetd.conf.
I'll
donate mine if people want it.
4. Status quo.
My vote: If enough people want it, I'd be willing to support options 2
or 3. If not, I've seen enough reasonable arguments than mine to
change my vote to option 4. (The bullying and insults didn't change my
mind. The few reasonable arguments -- Robert Watson's note comes to
mind -- is what did it).
Regards, Phone: (250)387-8437
Cy Schubert Fax: (250)387-5766
Team Leader, Sun/DEC Team Internet: Cy.Schubert@osg.gov.bc.ca
Open Systems Group, ITSD, ISTA
Province of BC
To Unsubscribe: send mail to majordomo@FreeBSD.org
with "unsubscribe freebsd-arch" in the body of the message
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?200009161534.e8GFYDc32614>