depending on your definition of 'trivial', passive FTP is trivially tested:
grunion:~ emileaben$ telnet ftp.freebsd.org 21 Trying 204.152.184.73... Connected to ftp.freebsd.org. Escape character is '^]'. 220 Welcome to freebsd.isc.org. USER anonymous 331 Please specify the password. PASS [EMAIL PROTECTED] 230- 230-You have reached the freebsd.isc.org FTP server, serving the 230-full FreeBSD FTP archive over IPv4 (204.152.184.73) and IPv6 230-(2001:4f8:0:2::e) networks. This server is also known as: 230- 230- ftp.freebsd.org 230- ftp4.freebsd.org 230- ftp4.us.freebsd.org 230- 230-This server is operated by Internet Systems Consortium (ISC), 230-on behalf of the FreeBSD Project, with hardware donations from 230-Apple, Intel and Iron Systems. 230- 230-Questions about this service can be sent to: [EMAIL PROTECTED] 230- 230 Login successful. PASV 227 Entering Passive Mode (204,152,184,73,127,51) LIST (here comes the somewhat less trivial part): Open a new shell somewhere, and calculate where the 'ls' output is going from the 227-passive FTP line, first 4 octets are the IP address, in this case it's 204.152.184.73, last 2 octets are the portnumber: 127 * 256 + 51 = 32563 So I can retrieve the 'ls' output by: grunion:~ emileaben$ telnet 204.152.184.73 32563 Trying 204.152.184.73... Connected to freebsd.isc.org. Escape character is '^]'. drwxrwxr-x 3 0 0 512 Apr 17 2003 pub Connection closed by foreign host. grunion:~ emileaben$ unfortunately this doesn't work for active FTP (since the server will initiate a connection to you), you could use 'netcat' or something to catch that. hth, emile On 3/27/06, Stewart Stremler <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > begin quoting Tracy R Reed as of Mon, Mar 27, 2006 at 10:23:16AM -0800: > > Stewart Stremler wrote: > > > FTP is a protocol that's not easily testable with a telnet client. > > > > Neither is ntp, nfs, rdp, X, or a zillion others. Being easily testable > > with telnet just means the protocol is trivial. > > Um, no. > > "Easily testable with telne" != "trivial". > > But that's beside the point. > > FTP *could* have been... the other big file-transfer protocol out there > these days _is_ testable with telnet. > > > > You like default-allow security policies then? > > > > No, I like default-deny. That has nothing to do with NAT though. > > NAT enforces a default-deny policy. It has some other limitations, > which is where most anti-NAT folks scream and shout... but if you > hit those limitations, you really need to move up to proxy firewalls. > > Which, oddly enough, look like NAT to the outside world... all users > behind it generally share one IP. > > -- > _ |\_ > \| > > > -- > [email protected] > http://www.kernel-panic.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/kplug-list > -- [email protected] http://www.kernel-panic.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/kplug-list
