XP Without telnet?
Page 1 of 2 12 LastLast
Results 1 to 10 of 12

Thread: XP Without telnet?

  1. #1
    Junior Member
    Join Date
    Nov 2002

    XP Without telnet?

    Hello, i 've got (another) quiestion, i can't find telnet on my computer! I have recently installed windows XP again, but now there is no telnet on my computer? Is this a problem on the computer, or doesn't XP have telnet? (if i search for the file i can't find it anywhere!)

    Can Anybody help me with this?

    Thanx, from MetalMaggot

  2. #2
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Jul 2002
    It's there it goes through a dos prompt though, click on the menu and go to run and typr in telnet.
    Every now and then, one of you won't annoy me.

  3. #3
    yes bludgeon is right the telnet client runs under DOS
    \"Knowledge is Power\"

  4. #4
    Senior since the 3 dot era
    Join Date
    Nov 2001
    2 notes on this:
    runs under DOS
    the thing you call DOS under XP is not really MS-DOS like ms-dos 6.02 or something but a dos emulation since xp or nt / win2000 no longer use the dos layer. Anyway the method is right open up a command line and type telnet, this will start your telnet client.
    [How do I, What is?]
    this part of the forum isn't meant to post things questions like this
    Home/ Forums/ AntiOnline Site Related/ AntiOnline: How Do I? or What Is?/
    you see the index before "AntiOnline: How Do I? or What Is?" , it says "AntiOnline Site Related"

    but I can't blaim you cause many people seem to post questions in this forum, thinking it's an overall question forum.

  5. #5
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Oct 2001
    ive never really used windows telent anyway, i used putty or tera term pro


  6. #6
    Junior Member
    Join Date
    Jan 2002
    Why donīt you use hyperterminal instead of MS-DOS telnet!!!

  7. #7
    Senior Member roswell1329's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2002
    Why are any of you using Telnet at all? All of you should be using secure shell for your connections. Shame on all of you for letting this AO newbie perpetuate evil unsecured protocols!

    Don't listen to 'em MetalMaggot! So yourself a favor, and grab a copy of puTTY, and make sure that the connections you make with it have the SSH option selected near where you enter in the host name. Only use telnet when you don't need to enter a password. For everything else, use SSH!
    /* You are not expected to understand this. */

  8. #8
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Jul 2002
    Ahahah Roswell. Don't be so quick to dismiss gnarly old telnet. More then a client/server, telnet is a protocol with many many uses. Did you know you can port surf, send mail, chat on IRC, negotiate a HTTP connection with a web server and 1000 other things that function on the telnet protocol?? It's very useful for debugging many networking problems, and is indispensible when netcat just isn't enough in the flow control department. Read the RFC here:

    It's a fun toy for girls and boys....
    \"Now it\'s time to erase the story of our bogus fate. Our history as it\'s portrayed is just a recipe for hate!\"
    -Bad Religion

  9. #9
    Join Date
    Dec 2002
    Must agree with both doktorf00bar and roswell1329 . SSH does offer a much more secure connection, using proper encryption and stuff. But for general fun (hmm fun?) with TCP ports, ranging from telnet to IRC, telnet is quite useful. It cant handle crypto keys and offer the security level ssh doe, of course. But in general, it might be a nice tool for learning how some applications protocols work, and to gather information about a service .
    Though it is quite nice, i would recommend Netcat, which can be found in here .
    It can be used to listen to a specific port, is able to handle UDP connections, among other features. Get a ssh client, like putty as well and have fun.
    Cheers! ssh as often as possible, netcat for the other opportunities!

  10. #10
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Jan 2002
    Although ssh is far more secure than telnet, there are some legitimate reasons for using telnet as opposed to ssh.

    One situation that springs to mind. A lot of companies out there (including where I work) have a lot of other companies accessing our systems remotely. In this instance, it is desireable to have an IDS in place, ensuring that these untrusted people dont do anything that are not supposed to.

    My point being, that a network IDS is useless when it comes to encrypted protocols. Untrusted users could tunnel any type of traffic, and the IDS would know any better, which is a potentical security risk.

    So remember, although ssh is more secure, there are legitimate security reasons for not using it!!

    [glowpurple]There were so many fewer questions when the stars where still just the holes to heaven - JJ[/glowpurple] [gloworange]I sure could use a vacation from this bull$hit, three ringed circus side show of freaks. - Tool. [/gloworange]

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts