• Terminals in X Window System.

    From peter@peter@easthope.ca to comp.security.misc on Wed Mar 12 06:41:07 2025
    From Newsgroup: comp.security.misc

    Hi,

    In a Linux X Window System, is "telnet localhost" less secure than
    "xterm localhost"? If so, why?

    Thx, ... P.



    --- Synchronet 3.20c-Linux NewsLink 1.2
  • From Marco Moock@mm@dorfdsl.de to comp.security.misc on Wed Mar 12 17:08:38 2025
    From Newsgroup: comp.security.misc

    On 12.03.2025 06:41 Uhr peter@easthope.ca wrote:

    In a Linux X Window System, is "telnet localhost" less secure than
    "xterm localhost"? If so, why?

    It gives me
    m@ryz:~$ xterm localhost
    xterm: No absolute path found for shell: localhost

    Is that what you ran?

    What should it do?

    telnet offers you to login if a telnet server is running. As long this connection is only inside your system, this is secure. If it is going
    outside, you need to have an underlaying protocol (IPsec or a VPN
    tunnel) to avoid eavesdropping, as normal telnet is not encrypted.
    --
    kind regards
    Marco

    Send spam to 1741758067muell@stinkedores.dorfdsl.de

    --- Synchronet 3.20c-Linux NewsLink 1.2
  • From Richard Kettlewell@invalid@invalid.invalid to comp.security.misc on Wed Mar 12 19:31:00 2025
    From Newsgroup: comp.security.misc

    Marco Moock <mm@dorfdsl.de> writes:
    On 12.03.2025 06:41 Uhr peter@easthope.ca wrote:
    In a Linux X Window System, is "telnet localhost" less secure than
    "xterm localhost"? If so, why?

    It gives me
    m@ryz:~$ xterm localhost
    xterm: No absolute path found for shell: localhost

    Is that what you ran?

    What should it do?

    That’s the expected behavior. It tries to run ‘localhost’ as a shell and of course, it doesn’t exist.
    --
    https://www.greenend.org.uk/rjk/
    --- Synchronet 3.20c-Linux NewsLink 1.2
  • From peter@peter@easthope.ca to comp.security.misc on Thu Mar 13 08:28:55 2025
    From Newsgroup: comp.security.misc

    Marco, Richard & all,

    In article <20250312170838.7d5b1e1c@ryz.dorfdsl.de>, Marco Moock <mm@dorfdsl.de> wrote:
    It gives me
    m@ryz:~$ xterm localhost
    xterm: No absolute path found for shell: localhost

    Is that what you ran?

    Correction: I should have asked, is "telnet localhost" less secure
    than "xterm"?

    telnet offers you to login if a telnet server is running.

    In Debian,
    # grep ^telnet /etc/inetd.conf
    telnet stream tcp nowait root /usr/sbin/tcpd /usr/sbin/telnetd -E /bin/bash

    Nobody other than me has an account on the system. I authenticate
    after the system boots or when returning after logout. Neither "telnet localhost" nor "xterm" asks for a password.

    As long this connection is only inside your system, this is
    secure. If it is going outside, you need to have an underlaying
    protocol (IPsec or a VPN tunnel) to avoid eavesdropping, as normal
    telnet is not encrypted.

    Shorewall is configured to prevent a telnet connection from outside
    localhost.

    So my configuration is unusual but not particularly hazardous?

    Thanks, ... P.

    --- Synchronet 3.20c-Linux NewsLink 1.2
  • From Marco Moock@mm@dorfdsl.de to comp.security.misc on Thu Mar 13 20:10:54 2025
    From Newsgroup: comp.security.misc

    On 13.03.2025 08:28 Uhr peter@easthope.ca wrote:

    Marco, Richard & all,

    In article <20250312170838.7d5b1e1c@ryz.dorfdsl.de>, Marco Moock <mm@dorfdsl.de> wrote:
    It gives me
    m@ryz:~$ xterm localhost
    xterm: No absolute path found for shell: localhost

    Is that what you ran?

    Correction: I should have asked, is "telnet localhost" less secure
    than "xterm"?

    Completely different stuff. xterm just opens a terminal emulator on
    your system. telnet connects to a telnet server, usually a remote
    system.

    telnet offers you to login if a telnet server is running.

    In Debian,
    # grep ^telnet /etc/inetd.conf
    telnet stream tcp nowait root /usr/sbin/tcpd /usr/sbin/telnetd -E
    /bin/bash

    Nobody other than me has an account on the system. I authenticate
    after the system boots or when returning after logout. Neither
    "telnet localhost" nor "xterm" asks for a password.

    If telnet doesn't ask for a password, this is a security problem if
    other people (locally or remote) can access the telnet server.

    As long this connection is only inside your system, this is
    secure. If it is going outside, you need to have an underlaying
    protocol (IPsec or a VPN tunnel) to avoid eavesdropping, as normal
    telnet is not encrypted.

    Shorewall is configured to prevent a telnet connection from outside localhost.

    So my configuration is unusual but not particularly hazardous?

    As long as it stays so, it is. But when other people can access it,
    they can take over control of your system.

    Now a really stupid question: Why do you need a local telnet server?
    Isn't xterm, and if needed, su, enough?
    --
    kind regards
    Marco

    Send spam to 1741850935muell@stinkedores.dorfdsl.de

    --- Synchronet 3.20c-Linux NewsLink 1.2
  • From Richard Kettlewell@invalid@invalid.invalid to comp.security.misc on Thu Mar 13 21:11:40 2025
    From Newsgroup: comp.security.misc

    peter@easthope.ca writes:
    Marco Moock <mm@dorfdsl.de> wrote:
    It gives me
    m@ryz:~$ xterm localhost
    xterm: No absolute path found for shell: localhost

    Is that what you ran?

    Correction: I should have asked, is "telnet localhost" less secure
    than "xterm"?

    They do different things, so it’s not clear why you’d compare them.

    telnet offers you to login if a telnet server is running.

    In Debian,
    # grep ^telnet /etc/inetd.conf
    telnet stream tcp nowait root /usr/sbin/tcpd /usr/sbin/telnetd -E /bin/bash

    Nobody other than me has an account on the system. I authenticate
    after the system boots or when returning after logout. Neither "telnet localhost" nor "xterm" asks for a password.

    A telnetd without a password will allow lateral movement from other
    UIDs.

    -
    https://www.greenend.org.uk/rjk/
    --- Synchronet 3.20c-Linux NewsLink 1.2
  • From Grant Taylor@gtaylor@tnetconsulting.net to comp.security.misc on Thu Mar 13 21:38:01 2025
    From Newsgroup: comp.security.misc

    On 3/12/25 8:41 AM, peter@easthope.ca wrote:
    In a Linux X Window System, is "telnet localhost" less secure than
    "xterm localhost"? If so, why?

    It's difficult to say, there isn't enough information to actually answer
    the question. See below for more context.



    On 3/13/25 2:10 PM, Marco Moock wrote:
    Completely different stuff. xterm just opens a terminal emulator on
    your system. telnet connects to a telnet server, usually a remote
    system.

    On one hand I agree that telnet and XTerm are different things. But on
    the other hand, I disagree.

    Both commands are used to open a shell on a system.

    Telnet is usually a remote system but can be the local system.

    Xterm is usually the local system, but can very easily be used across
    the network.

    So in some ways, both telnet and XTerm open a shell on the local and /
    or remote system.

    Also, both are traditionally unencrypted protocols. There are some TLS encrypted telnet servers and clients. Admittedly they are usually
    relegated to the the mainframe space.

    I think one of the biggest hangups for me is where and how are `telnet localhost` and `xterm` being run? Is `telnet localhost` being run from
    a shell? If so, what is displaying that shell? A terminal emulator;
    e.g. XTerm? Or possibly a (virtual) console (no X11)? Or maybe even a physical console on a serial port?

    I suppose there are also GUI telnet clients that are also their own
    terminal emulator.

    If telnet doesn't ask for a password, this is a security problem if
    other people (locally or remote) can access the telnet server.

    Maybe. Maybe not. Kerberized telnet clients have existed for quite a
    while. Just because something doesn't ask for a password doesn't mean
    that it's not authenticated.

    As long as it stays so, it is. But when other people can access it,
    they can take over control of your system.

    I think it's important to understand what is providing the security (authentication <-> privacy) and how various things influence / impact that.

    Now a really stupid question: Why do you need a local telnet server?
    Isn't xterm, and if needed, su, enough?

    I think that it's a fair question. I think it's orthogonal to the OP's original question. But you did ask it after providing good responses to
    the OP's question.
    --
    Grant. . . .
    --- Synchronet 3.20c-Linux NewsLink 1.2
  • From peter@peter@easthope.ca to comp.security.misc on Fri Mar 14 13:09:36 2025
    From Newsgroup: comp.security.misc

    In article <20250313201054.0371059b@ryz.dorfdsl.de>,
    Marco Moock <mm@dorfdsl.de> wrote:
    Now a really stupid question: Why do you need a local telnet server?
    Isn't xterm, and if needed, su, enough?

    Absoutely reasonable to ask. The client side of the communication
    does not have xterm or su.
    https://en.wikibooks.org/wiki/Oberon/A2

    A2 has a secure shell but I tend to use the Oberon subsystem.
    Oberon has an old ssh client. Needs major work for compatibility
    with the current environment.

    From: Richard Kettlewell <invalid@invalid.invalid>
    Date: Thu, 13 Mar 2025 21:11:40 +0000
    A telnetd without a password will allow lateral movement from other
    UIDs.

    I am the only user of the system and it has shorewall and I give a
    password to log in. As I understand, laterality isn't possible.

    As a system becomes more complex, there is more scope for vulnerability.
    Eg. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/XZ_Utils_backdoor

    The reply of Prof. Wirth to the question at 49:40 is pertinent.
    "No side doors and no backdoors."
    https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=EXY78gPMvl0

    Regards, ... P.



    --- Synchronet 3.20c-Linux NewsLink 1.2
  • From Richard Kettlewell@invalid@invalid.invalid to comp.security.misc on Fri Mar 14 21:04:06 2025
    From Newsgroup: comp.security.misc

    peter@easthope.ca writes:
    Marco Moock <mm@dorfdsl.de> wrote:
    Now a really stupid question: Why do you need a local telnet server?
    Isn't xterm, and if needed, su, enough?

    Absoutely reasonable to ask. The client side of the communication
    does not have xterm or su.
    https://en.wikibooks.org/wiki/Oberon/A2

    A2 has a secure shell but I tend to use the Oberon subsystem.
    Oberon has an old ssh client. Needs major work for compatibility
    with the current environment.

    It looks like you’re asking some kind of Oberon-based environment to run telnet localhost, in a window or something like that? Seems like a
    complicated way to get a shell, can’t the Oberon environment run it
    directly?
    --
    https://www.greenend.org.uk/rjk/
    --- Synchronet 3.20c-Linux NewsLink 1.2
  • From peter@peter@easthope.ca to comp.security.misc on Sun Mar 16 08:21:40 2025
    From Newsgroup: comp.security.misc

    In article <wwvbju31fzt.fsf@LkoBDZeT.terraraq.uk>,
    Richard Kettlewell <invalid@invalid.invalid> wrote:
    ... can�ęt the Oberon environment run it directly?

    Two entities communicate directly. One is the telnet daemon on the
    linux host. The other is the telnet client in the Oberon subsystem.

    Demonstating in your system is a small execise. Install LinuxA2 and
    try it. https://en.wikibooks.org/wiki/Oberon/A2

    If you see a way to make the link more direct, please let me know or
    edit the wiki.

    Thanks, ... P.

    --- Synchronet 3.20c-Linux NewsLink 1.2
  • From Richard Kettlewell@invalid@invalid.invalid to comp.security.misc on Sun Mar 16 16:13:59 2025
    From Newsgroup: comp.security.misc

    peter@easthope.ca writes:
    Richard Kettlewell <invalid@invalid.invalid> wrote:
    ... can’t the Oberon environment run it directly?

    Two entities communicate directly. One is the telnet daemon on the
    linux host. The other is the telnet client in the Oberon subsystem.

    My point is that the use of telnet is completely redundant here
    (assuming I’ve guessed the goal correctly). Contrast with any terminal emulator (for example, xterm), which runs the shell (or other command) directly.

    Demonstating in your system is a small execise. Install LinuxA2 and
    try it. https://en.wikibooks.org/wiki/Oberon/A2

    I’m not really interested in doing that.

    If you see a way to make the link more direct, please let me know or
    edit the wiki.

    The functions in https://man7.org/linux/man-pages/man3/openpty.3.html
    should be sufficient, if your Oberon environment can call them.
    --
    https://www.greenend.org.uk/rjk/
    --- Synchronet 3.20c-Linux NewsLink 1.2
  • From William Unruh@unruh@invalid.ca to comp.security.misc on Wed Mar 19 15:52:24 2025
    From Newsgroup: comp.security.misc

    On 2025-03-13, Marco Moock <mm@dorfdsl.de> wrote:
    On 13.03.2025 08:28 Uhr peter@easthope.ca wrote:


    Correction: I should have asked, is "telnet localhost" less secure
    than "xterm"?

    Completely different stuff. xterm just opens a terminal emulator on
    your system. telnet connects to a telnet server, usually a remote
    system.

    And connects with everything sent in the clear. Use ssh instead.
    --- Synchronet 3.20c-Linux NewsLink 1.2
  • From peter@peter@easthope.ca to comp.security.misc on Sun Mar 23 11:23:31 2025
    From Newsgroup: comp.security.misc

    Richard & all,

    In article <wwvr030d4ab.fsf@LkoBDZeT.terraraq.uk>,
    Richard Kettlewell <invalid@invalid.invalid> wrote:
    They do different things, so it�ęs not clear why you�ęd compare them.

    Screenshots are at https://easthope.ca/XtermVersusTelnet.png .
    I recognize that the window frames and fonts differ. Window contents
    are similar and functionalities for a user are similar.

    A telnetd without a password will allow lateral movement from other
    UIDs.

    A password is required to log in to the system and I am the only
    person with accounts. The root account and a user account. Please
    outline how lateralization can happen.

    Thanks, ... P.

    --- Synchronet 3.20c-Linux NewsLink 1.2
  • From Richard Kettlewell@invalid@invalid.invalid to comp.security.misc on Sun Mar 23 19:34:14 2025
    From Newsgroup: comp.security.misc

    peter@easthope.ca writes:
    Richard Kettlewell <invalid@invalid.invalid> wrote:
    They do different things, so it’s not clear why you’d compare them.

    Screenshots are at https://easthope.ca/XtermVersusTelnet.png .
    I recognize that the window frames and fonts differ. Window contents
    are similar and functionalities for a user are similar.

    You’re comparing xterm with the Oberon environment creating a window and connect it to the input and output of ‘telnet localhost’; not quite what you originally askled about.

    A telnetd without a password will allow lateral movement from other
    UIDs.

    A password is required to log in to the system

    In the configuration described at https://en.wikibooks.org/wiki/Oberon/ETH_Oberon, no password is required
    to log in via telnet. A completely insecure configuration and
    irresponsible of whoever wrote that page to recommend it, IMO.

    What Oberon _should_ be doing here is creating a psuedoterminal and
    running the shell inside it (which is what xterm does internally).

    and I am the only person with accounts. The root account and a user
    account. Please outline how lateralization can happen.

    In this case by lateral movement I mean an attacker who has compromised
    one UID escalating privilege to another UID. In this case, it’s as
    simple as “telnet localhost”.
    --
    https://www.greenend.org.uk/rjk/
    --- Synchronet 3.20c-Linux NewsLink 1.2
  • From peter@peter@easthope.ca to comp.security.misc on Sun Mar 23 22:02:58 2025
    From Newsgroup: comp.security.misc

    In article <wwvwmcf8rt5.fsf@LkoBDZeT.terraraq.uk>, Richard Kettlewell <invalid@invalid.invalid> wrote:
    In this case by lateral movement I mean an attacker who has
    compromised one UID escalating privilege to another UID. In this
    case, it�ęs as simple as �Ĝtelnet localhost�ĝ.

    OK, thanks, ... P.

    --- Synchronet 3.20c-Linux NewsLink 1.2
  • From William Unruh@unruh@invalid.ca to comp.security.misc on Wed Mar 26 06:02:10 2025
    From Newsgroup: comp.security.misc

    On 2025-03-23, peter@easthope.ca <peter@easthope.ca> wrote:
    Richard & all,

    In article <wwvr030d4ab.fsf@LkoBDZeT.terraraq.uk>,
    Richard Kettlewell <invalid@invalid.invalid> wrote:
    They do different things, so itâęs not clear why youâęd compare them.

    Screenshots are at https://easthope.ca/XtermVersusTelnet.png .
    I recognize that the window frames and fonts differ. Window contents
    are similar and functionalities for a user are similar.

    A telnetd without a password will allow lateral movement from other
    UIDs.

    A password is required to log in to the system and I am the only
    person with accounts. The root account and a user account. Please
    outline how lateralization can happen.

    cat /etc/passwd
    Every line is yet another uid.
    You probably have about 100 of them.

    Thanks, ... P.

    --- Synchronet 3.20c-Linux NewsLink 1.2