From owner-freebsd-questions Fri Sep 19 23:34:13 1997 Return-Path: Received: (from root@localhost) by hub.freebsd.org (8.8.7/8.8.7) id XAA14766 for questions-outgoing; Fri, 19 Sep 1997 23:34:13 -0700 (PDT) Received: from gdi.uoregon.edu ([128.223.170.30]) by hub.freebsd.org (8.8.7/8.8.7) with ESMTP id XAA14760 for ; Fri, 19 Sep 1997 23:34:08 -0700 (PDT) Received: from localhost (dwhite@localhost) by gdi.uoregon.edu (8.8.5/8.8.5) with SMTP id XAA00848; Fri, 19 Sep 1997 23:31:56 -0700 (PDT) Date: Fri, 19 Sep 1997 23:31:55 -0700 (PDT) From: Doug White Reply-To: Doug White To: Arthur Alacar cc: questions@FreeBSD.ORG Subject: Re: telnet restriction. In-Reply-To: Message-ID: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII Sender: owner-freebsd-questions@FreeBSD.ORG X-Loop: FreeBSD.org Precedence: bulk On Fri, 19 Sep 1997, Arthur Alacar wrote: > in telnet we can specify other port number by specifying it in our command > line after the hostname, and the default port number is 23 (for telnet > service). the question is is it possible for my system to be configured in > such a way that it _restricts_ users from any remote access through a > different port number, thus only 23 service is allowed. So you want to keep people from telnetting to ports other than the standard telnet port, 23? You might be able to do it with tcp_wrappers, write a script that strips off the final argument, or modify the telnet source to hardware the destination port. Doug White | University of Oregon Internet: dwhite@resnet.uoregon.edu | Residence Networking Assistant http://gladstone.uoregon.edu/~dwhite | Computer Science Major Spam routed to /dev/null by Procmail | Death to Cyberpromo