I think, rsh is quite obsolete

[Dave Jones]

On Wed, Nov 08, 2006 at 06:48:46PM -0600, Chris Adams wrote:
 > Once upon a time, Dave Jones <davej at redhat.com> said:
 > > On Wed, Nov 08, 2006 at 11:50:51AM +0100, Adam Tkac wrote:
 > >  > I think, It's no argument to include rsh in next versions of fc/rhel.
 > >  > OpenSSH could successfully substitute this component. SSH is more secure
 > >  > than rsh and has all features of rsh. Do you think anything else??
 > > 
 > > The rsh _client_ has its uses in legacy environments.
 > > The daemon, questionable.
 > > Likewise, why we still ship telnet-server in core is beyond me.
 > 
 > I have needed telnet-server a few times when trying to debug when
 > connecting from network gear (no ssh in most).

hmm, would they have had rsh?

 > Also, where we allow
 > shell access to web hosting customers, we still allow telnet (most of
 > them are on Windows and it only includes a telnet client).

by default yes, but there are a number of good free windows ssh clients.

 > Both telnet and rsh (client and server) are stable packages with few
 > security issues historically.

security-wise, they are inherently broken by design in that they transmit
everything in cleartext.

		Dave

-- 
http://www.codemonkey.org.uk