[gopher] Re: Problem with SiMpLeMaChInEs
Testing indicates that software expecting to see gopher on Port 70 will NOT translate to another port.
Bobcat for DOS will fail
Lynx for DOS will fail
Internet Explorer will NOT see your server, and will either give an error message (if attaching to a sub-directory) or crash the browser if connecting to the root directory.
Older versions of Lynx for Windows will fail [but upgrading to the newest version will work].
Older versions of Firefox will fail [but upgrading to the newest version will work].
The MSNTV (WebTV) browser will fail.
Documentation indicates the Acorn Risk OS client will fail.
Documentation indicates the Atari MiNT client will fail.
Documentation indicates the IBM CMS mainframe clients will fail.
Documentation indicates the VAX mainframe client will fail.
The MOO object will fail
The AmigaOS client will fail.
The OS/2 client will fail.
All the Windows 3.1 clients tested so far have failed.
All the DOS clients tested so far have failed.
I have not tested either the Commodore 64 client, Macintosh clients, the NeXT client, or the Unix clients.
A while ago when SiMpLe MaChInEs was operating on Port 70, there was no problem with any of the above software connecting. Moving your server off of Port 70 for a "preceived" security concern is preventing a large chunk of software and potential users (especially in non-US countries where older equipment dominates) from reaching your Server. Whether any of us like it or not, much software is "Hard Coded" to expect Gopher on Port 70.
Note that JumpJet has always operated on Port 70, and there has never been any security breaches because of its using Port 70. I urge you to switch back.
SiMpLe MaChInEs <firstname.lastname@example.org> wrote:
JumpJet Mailbox wrote:
> Yes, testing has confirmed that it is indeed a Port 70 issue. This is
> now preventing computer platforms using either Windows or Pure DOS (and
> I suspect Atari, Acorn, and Amiga) from accessing your Server.
Well, I'm not so sure it's a Winderz problem. I just pulled Simple up
on Firefox-184.108.40.206 on XP-Pro/SP2 without any issues. Below are the
Mozilla/5.0 (Windows; U; Windows NT 5.1; en-US; rv:220.127.116.11)
I don't have any other Windows versions to test. Maybe it's a Windows
Firewall issue, though I don't have any unusual exceptions in mine.
> Is there any vital reason why you had to move the server away from
> Port 70, and is there any compelling reason why you could not return it
> to Port 70?
I'd rather not use a privileged port because the server then needs to be
run by root and is possibly more susceptible to security breaches. I
think this is a pretty common strategy with other network services, ie.
NATing 80 to 8000 for web servers.
Shape Yahoo! in your own image. Join our Network Research Panel today!