[trebligdivad]

Why are people still using telnet across the internet in this century? Was this _all_ attack traffic?

(OK, I know one ancient talker that uses it - but on a very non-standard port so a port 23 block wouldn't be relevant)

[jaredsohn]

To watch Star Wars in ASCII.

telnet towel.blinkenlights.nl https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Mhcf6tc2jeQ

(Remember hearing about this a long time ago (from some searching I think it was in 1999 via Slashdot) and verified some instance of it still exists/works.)

[mmooss]

  Connection failed

Maybe we should give the kind person who hosts it a break. Try it out tomorrow. (Yes, I should have thought of that before I tried.)

[cbarrick]

~~IIRC the blinkenlights telnet movies have been offline for a few years already.~~

[0xbadcafebee]

Telnet is used in legacy, IoT, embedded, and low-level industrial hardware. It's also intentionally enabled on devices where automation was written for telnet and it wasn't easy to switch to ssh.

If you investigate most commercial uses of ssh, the security is disabled or ignored. Nobody verifies host keys, and with automation where hosts cycle, you basically have to disable verification as there's no easy way around the host keys constantly changing. Without host key verification, there's kinda no point to the rest.

Even assuming the host keys were verified, the popular ssh conventions are to use either long-lived static keys (and almost nobody puts a password on theirs), or a password. Very few people use SSH with 2FA, and almost no-one uses ephemeral keys (OIDC) or certificates (which many people screw up).

So in terms of how people actually use it, SSH is one of the least secure transport methods. You'd be much more secure by using telnet over an HTTPS websocket with OAuth for login.

[ajross]

> Nobody verifies host keys,

The known_hosts file is verification of host keys. It's not verification of a host cert, which is a different thing. Most sshd instances are running on ad hoc hardware without the ability to associate them with someone a cert authority would be willing to authenticate.

Basically people running services that need cert-based authentication are already using TLS (or if they're using sshd they've locked it down appropriately). SSH is for your workstation and your RPi and whatnot.

[taftster]

How do you automate, for example, "HTTPS over websocket with OAuth", without providing some kind of hard-coded, static or otherwise persistent authentication credentials to the calling system in some form (either certificate based auth, OAuth credentials, etc.)?

The problem with IoT and embedded secrets isn't really a solved problem, from what I can tell. I'm not sure that OAuth exactly solves the problem here. Though all your comments about SSH (especially host verification) holds true.

Just honestly trying to understand the possible solution space to the IoT problem and automated (non-human) authorization.

[watermelon0]

Unless you manage to leak your private host/client SSH keys, this is close to being as secure as it gets.

I'd say that HTTPS (or TLS in general) is more problematic, since you need to trust numerous root CAs in machine/browser store. Sure, you can use certificate pinning, but that has the same issues as SSH host key verification.

[Fnoord]

> Very few people use SSH with 2FA.

PCI DSS, HIPAA, and ISO 27001 each either highly recommend or enforce this.

I wouldn't use a jumphost without it.

[iamnothere]

Hams use it over packet radio sometimes since encryption is forbidden on the amateur bands.

IMHO we need a good telnet replacement that sends signed data. Most people interpret signatures as allowed under FCC rules, just not encryption.

[mananaysiempre]

> IMHO we need a good telnet replacement that sends signed data. Most people interpret signatures as allowed under FCC rules, just not encryption.

I know from bitter experience that IPsec is a “now you have two problems” kind of solution, but the Authentication Header is a thing and is supported by most (all?) implementations. Ham radio operators probably don’t have much use for the actual features of telnet compared to plain netcat, do they? (It’s mostly terminal feature negotiation and such.)

[ErroneousBosh]

Most people don't care about FCC rules.

I'm breaking a tonne of FCC rules right now.

[lambdaone]

You can use ssh with the None cipher, thus disabling encryption entirely while still using the rest of the protocol.

[rcakebread]

One? All the talkers still use it and all the MUDs/MOOs etc. far out number the talkers.

[conesus]

N.U.T.S. 3.3.3 4eva! There was a NUTS 4, but about a decade too late.

[mcpherrinm]

As I understand it, greynoise is monitoring scanner traffic, so yes this would all be scans or attacks

[myko]

I run a DikuMUD that users connect to using Telnet

I really should update it to allow more secure options

[Fnoord]

> that users connect to using Telnet

Not anymore ;)

Seriously though: did you notice any spikes up or down?

If you'd run it on a non-standard port, anyone can still connect with netcat, socat, etc etc.

[VadimPR]

One reason would be to play MUDs, which are very well and alive these days!

[semyonsh]

How else would I connect to my BBS to play L.O.R.D. and check FidoNet.

[omegaham]

nethack.alt.org still maintains a telnet server!

[RupertSalt]

I've always used ssh to connect to it. And it's true that their port 23 is still open at last check. If you cannot reach port 23, and you irrationally hate ssh, you may use 14321 as an alternate.

https://www.alt.org/nethack/

[breve]

telnet lambda.moo.mud.org 8888

[dekhn]

MUDs were my introduction to telnet- I grew up a university kid and had access to Wesleyan's minicomputer EAGLE.WESLEYAN.EDU running OpenVMS. I used it to telnet to CMU's TinyMUD and later other TinyMUDs around the country. I recall OpenVMS's telnet had a problem with newlines/carriage returns so all the text was staircased, so I ended up learning C and writing a MUD client. I still habitually use telnet today even if netcat and many other tools have replaced it.

All of that was foundational for my career and I still look back fondly on the technology of the time, which tended to be fairly "open" to exploration by curious-minded teenagers.

[para_parolu]

Aardwolf works well from my work laptop. And I don’t care if someone sees what I’m doing

[stenius]

Do you care if they steal your account though and drop all your inventory?

The problem is the auth is plain text too and you're open to having your credentials stolen.

[Quarrel]

Probably one of the reasons this bug survived so long is that it isn't used much for priveleged access any more, but so you can play a moo or play you an ASCII movie, as people below you are replying.

[Suzuran]

Some of us still run historical systems for preservation's sake.

[thrance]

To play DOOM.

  telnet doom.w-graj.net 666