No Java means no IRC at red and black. If someone wants to send me the pass word and info on how to get a terminal window here I'll install it. Stefan
-- "If ever a time should come where vain and aspiring men shall posses the highest seats in government. Our country will stand in need of its experienced patriots to prevent its ruin." -Sam Adams
>>>>> "Stefan" == Stefan Mintier <smint...@gmail.com> writes:
Stefan> No Java means no IRC at red and black. If someone wants to Stefan> send me the pass word and info on how to get a terminal window Stefan> here I'll install it. Stefan
/me confused. Java would run on your browser, not on the router. If your machine has java, that should probably work for you. I'm not sure there even *is* a java available for OpenWrt (there probably is) but ... I can't imagine it is remotely necessary.
-- Russell Senior, Secretary russ...@personaltelco.net
On Fri, May 2, 2008 at 7:05 PM, Russell Senior <russ...@personaltelco.net> wrote:
> >>>>> "Stefan" == Stefan Mintier <smint...@gmail.com> writes:
> Stefan> No Java means no IRC at red and black. If someone wants to > Stefan> send me the pass word and info on how to get a terminal window > Stefan> here I'll install it. Stefan
> /me confused. Java would run on your browser, not on the router. If > your machine has java, that should probably work for you. I'm not > sure there even *is* a java available for OpenWrt (there probably is) > but ... I can't imagine it is remotely necessary.
Does Freegeek have terminals set up in this red and black location like they did in the other? Stefan, are you referring to a computer on the network with which you're trying to connect with? Port 194 is not blocked at that location as far as I know.
If you are talking about a terminal that they have there for internet use then you'll probably have to request to freegeek to have java installed.
Stefan> No Java means no IRC at red and black. If someone wants to Stefan> send me the pass word and info on how to get a terminal window Stefan> here I'll install it. Stefan
[...]
Aaron> If you are talking about a terminal that they have there for Aaron> internet use then you'll probably have to request to freegeek Aaron> to have java installed.
/me points at Aaron. That is exactly right. FreeGeek set up a LTSP box with two terminals. I don't have the password on that box, so your request should definitely go to FreeGeek, as they administer the box. Or they could install a real IRC client. Or both.
-- Russell Senior, Secretary russ...@personaltelco.net
> Stefan> No Java means no IRC at red and black. If someone wants to
> Stefan> send me the pass word and info on how to get a terminal window
> Stefan> here I'll install it. Stefan
> [...]
> Aaron> If you are talking about a terminal that they have there for
> Aaron> internet use then you'll probably have to request to freegeek
> Aaron> to have java installed.
> /me points at Aaron. That is exactly right. FreeGeek set up a LTSP
> box with two terminals. I don't have the password on that box, so
> your request should definitely go to FreeGeek, as they administer the
> box. Or they could install a real IRC client. Or both.
> --
> Russell Senior, Secretary
> russ...@personaltelco.net
On Fri, May 2, 2008 at 4:14 PM, Stefan Mintier <smint...@gmail.com> wrote: > No Java means no IRC at red and black. > If someone wants to send me the pass word and info on how to get a terminal > window here I'll install it. > Stefan
IRC is an insecure protocol. I won't use it on wifi. I ssh to another machine, and use it via that. -- teknotus Take Notice (503) 409-1735
On Fri, May 2, 2008 at 4:14 PM, Stefan Mintier <smint...@gmail.com> wrote: > No Java means no IRC at red and black. > If someone wants to send me the pass word and info on how to get a terminal > window here I'll install it. > Stefan
IRC is an insecure protocol. I won't use it on wifi. I ssh to another machine, and use it via that. -- teknotus Take Notice (503) 409-1735
On Wed, May 7, 2008 at 2:24 PM, Daniel Johnson <tekno...@gmail.com> wrote:
> On Fri, May 2, 2008 at 4:14 PM, Stefan Mintier <smint...@gmail.com> wrote: > > No Java means no IRC at red and black. > > If someone wants to send me the pass word and info on how to get a terminal > > window here I'll install it. > > Stefan
> IRC is an insecure protocol. I won't use it on wifi. I ssh to > another machine, and use it via that.
IRC does not require any logins nor is it secure on the server side, so ssh does not make it any more secure. When using IRC you should never transmit any secret/secure information. If the end point is insecure, adding security in between your computer and the end point really doesn't enhance security. -- Michael Weinberg President Personal Telco Project, Inc.
> IRC does not require any logins nor is it secure on the server side, > so ssh does not make it any more secure. When using IRC you should > never transmit any secret/secure information. If the end point is > insecure, adding security in between your computer and the end point > really doesn't enhance security.
Freenode requires logins to send direct user to user messages. Not very secure, but much more secure when done from a system where I know only the ISP, and admins of the freenode network can view raw traffic.
On Wed, May 7, 2008 at 3:09 PM, Daniel Johnson <tekno...@gmail.com> wrote:
> > IRC does not require any logins nor is it secure on the server side, > > so ssh does not make it any more secure. When using IRC you should > > never transmit any secret/secure information. If the end point is > > insecure, adding security in between your computer and the end point > > really doesn't enhance security.
> Freenode requires logins to send direct user to user messages. Not > very secure, but much more secure when done from a system where I know > only the ISP, and admins of the freenode network can view raw traffic.
True enough. IRC is so completely insecure (both in terms of connection and ability to verify who is on the other side of the chat) that freenode's direct message security and the notion that anything on IRC should be considered at all safe strikes me as dangerous/irresponsible Internet usage.
-- Michael Weinberg President Personal Telco Project, Inc.
> True enough. IRC is so completely insecure (both in terms of > connection and ability to verify who is on the other side of the chat) > that freenode's direct message security and the notion that anything > on IRC should be considered at all safe strikes me as > dangerous/irresponsible Internet usage.
Still I feel like every opportunity to make something less insecure should be taken. For example I wouldn't consider I wouldn't consider allowing access from a limited number of IP addresses as sufficient security in, and of itself, but adding it means that they have to know what IP's are allowed, and spoof them before they can even attempt to exploit other security holes. This gives you another opportunity to detect the intrusion attempt.
I secure protocol like ssh, or https is probably good enough on an open network like a personal telco node, but a completely insecure protocol like IRC justifies at least trying old school security techniques.
On Wed, May 7, 2008 at 3:23 PM, Daniel Johnson <tekno...@gmail.com> wrote:
> > True enough. IRC is so completely insecure (both in terms of > > connection and ability to verify who is on the other side of the chat) > > that freenode's direct message security and the notion that anything > > on IRC should be considered at all safe strikes me as > > dangerous/irresponsible Internet usage.
> Still I feel like every opportunity to make something less insecure > should be taken. For example I wouldn't consider I wouldn't consider > allowing access from a limited number of IP addresses as sufficient > security in, and of itself, but adding it means that they have to know > what IP's are allowed, and spoof them before they can even attempt to > exploit other security holes. This gives you another opportunity to > detect the intrusion attempt.
> I secure protocol like ssh, or https is probably good enough on an > open network like a personal telco node, but a completely insecure > protocol like IRC justifies at least trying old school security > techniques.
I can understand this, from a purely personal, psychological stand point, but from an educational position, which PTP has, an insecure connection/protocol is insecure. If you can't have end-to-end security, securing the mid-points does nothing but lure a user into a false sense of security. IRC--in a cafe, at home, in your office--should be treated as insecure, and used accordingly.
-- Michael Weinberg President Personal Telco Project, Inc.
