Op 31-jan-06 om 13:47 heeft Patrick Welche het volgende geschreven:

> On Mon, Jan 30, 2006 at 09:46:20PM +0100, Marc Coevoet wrote:
>> telnet -K 192.168.1.3
>> Trying 192.168.1.3...
>> telnet: connect to address 192.168.1.3: Connection refused
>> telnet: Unable to connect to remote host
>> localhost:~ marc$
>
> I haven't followed this from the beginning, just: is there a
> /etc/hosts.deny ALL: ALL on 192.168.1.3, and no corresponding
> /etc/hosts.allow telnetd: 192.168.whereever.you.are
>

Unfortunately, with a hosts.allow

ALL: ALL

it still don't work ...
localhost:~ marc$ telnet 192.168.1.3
Trying 192.168.1.3...
telnet: connect to address 192.168.1.3: Connection refused
telnet: Unable to connect to remote host
localhost:~ marc$ telnet 192.168.1.3
Trying 192.168.1.3...
Connected to 192.168.1.3.
Escape character is '^]'.

NetBSD/i386 (netbsdi386.fulladsl.be) (ttyp3)

login: root
Password:
login: pam_acct_mgmt: authentication error

The Pam thing is really interesting...


I'm starting to think that a system that is installed like that, you 
should declare it bankrupt ??


I thought "open"bsd was for secutity freaks ???

I'v been working on a netbsd mac68k in 1994-96 ...  But now I'm tired, 
when I see the kind of discussions here...
Somebody sees a file system soft to mount HFS, they don't ask the 
authors@univ if it can be used, they start a discussion about licenses 
...   Somewhere in LAME, I had to set an /etc file and say yeah, I 
agree, how symbolic is that??  I guess that when you deal a complete 
/etc-license file that you will get in netbsd jail ???  (It's all 
free-to-use soft, non-commercial ..)


Marc