Ancient telnet bug happily hands out root to attackers
- Reference: 1769084038
- News link: https://www.theregister.co.uk/2026/01/22/root_telnet_bug/
- Source link:
The bug, which had gone unnoticed for nearly 11 years, was disclosed on January 20 and is tracked as CVE-2026-24061 (9.8).
It was introduced in a May 2015 update, and if you're one of the few to still be running telnetd, patch up, because attacks are already underway.
[1]
GreyNoise data [2]shows that in the past 24 hours, 15 unique IPs were trying to execute a remote authentication bypass attack by using the vulnerability.
[3]
[4]
The [5]security advisory explains that the bug allows attackers to easily gain root access to a target system.
"The telnetd server invokes /usr/bin/login (normally running as root) passing the value of the USER environment variable received from the client as the last parameter," wrote GNU contributor Simon Josefsson.
[6]
"If the client supply
sic
a carefully crafted USER environment value being the string '-f root', and passes the telnet(1) -a or --login parameter to send this USER environment to the server, the client will be automatically logged in as root bypassing normal authentication processes."Stephen Fewer, senior principal researcher at Rapid7, told The Register the vulnerability has "a number of worrying factors."
The nature of the vulnerability, an argument injection flaw, means exploitation attempts are likely to be more reliable compared to more complex types, like memory corruption bugs, for example. The ease with which an attacker can successfully exploit it is also a concern.
[7]
"Exploiting this vulnerability is straightforward: as documented in the disclosure, simply running a specific telnet command to connect to a remote server can trigger the issue and grant an attacker root access," said Fewer.
"Rapid7 Labs has verified the vulnerability, confirming that exploitation is trivial and results in full root access on the target."
Fewer went on to say that anyone running telnetd in 2026 probably shouldn't be. The program is unencrypted, meaning attackers can intercept login attempts and sessions by packet sniffing.
[8]Curl shutters bug bounty program to remove incentive for submitting AI slop
[9]Cloudflare whacks WAF bypass bug that opened side door for attackers
[10]AI framework flaws put enterprise clouds at risk of takeover
[11]RondoDox botnet linked to large-scale exploit of critical HPE OneView bug
Users should at the very least update to the latest version of telnetd and close it off from the web, but better still, upgrade to a more secure alternative, such as SSH.
Josefsson also said in the advisory that his chief recommendation was for users to not run a telnetd server at all, and to restrict network access to the telnet port to trusted clients only.
Although telnetd fell out of favor years ago, with alternatives such as [12]SSH proving much more popular, contrary to popular belief, there are still a sizeable number of active deployments.
France's CERT issued an advisory on Wednesday, [13]saying "many telnet services are accessible on the internet, which is contrary to good practices. CERT-FR therefore recommends decommissioning all telnet services."
National cybersecurity authorities in [14]Canada and [15]Belgium echoed the same recommendations, warning of the risks of a successful exploit and urging the retirement of telnetd. ®
Get our [16]Tech Resources
[1] https://pubads.g.doubleclick.net/gampad/jump?co=1&iu=/6978/reg_security/patches&sz=300x50%7C300x100%7C300x250%7C300x251%7C300x252%7C300x600%7C300x601&tile=2&c=2aXJXwSxKUgfwiUgmI0z4UwAAAk4&t=ct%3Dns%26unitnum%3D2%26raptor%3Dcondor%26pos%3Dtop%26test%3D0
[2] https://viz.greynoise.io/tags/inetutils-telnetd--f-auth-bypass-attempt?days=1
[3] https://pubads.g.doubleclick.net/gampad/jump?co=1&iu=/6978/reg_security/patches&sz=300x50%7C300x100%7C300x250%7C300x251%7C300x252%7C300x600%7C300x601&tile=4&c=44aXJXwSxKUgfwiUgmI0z4UwAAAk4&t=ct%3Dns%26unitnum%3D4%26raptor%3Dfalcon%26pos%3Dmid%26test%3D0
[4] https://pubads.g.doubleclick.net/gampad/jump?co=1&iu=/6978/reg_security/patches&sz=300x50%7C300x100%7C300x250%7C300x251%7C300x252%7C300x600%7C300x601&tile=3&c=33aXJXwSxKUgfwiUgmI0z4UwAAAk4&t=ct%3Dns%26unitnum%3D3%26raptor%3Deagle%26pos%3Dmid%26test%3D0
[5] https://seclists.org/oss-sec/2026/q1/89
[6] https://pubads.g.doubleclick.net/gampad/jump?co=1&iu=/6978/reg_security/patches&sz=300x50%7C300x100%7C300x250%7C300x251%7C300x252%7C300x600%7C300x601&tile=4&c=44aXJXwSxKUgfwiUgmI0z4UwAAAk4&t=ct%3Dns%26unitnum%3D4%26raptor%3Dfalcon%26pos%3Dmid%26test%3D0
[7] https://pubads.g.doubleclick.net/gampad/jump?co=1&iu=/6978/reg_security/patches&sz=300x50%7C300x100%7C300x250%7C300x251%7C300x252%7C300x600%7C300x601&tile=3&c=33aXJXwSxKUgfwiUgmI0z4UwAAAk4&t=ct%3Dns%26unitnum%3D3%26raptor%3Deagle%26pos%3Dmid%26test%3D0
[8] https://www.theregister.com/2026/01/21/curl_ends_bug_bounty/
[9] https://www.theregister.com/2026/01/20/cloudflare_fixes_acme_validation/
[10] https://www.theregister.com/2026/01/20/ai_framework_flaws_enterprise_clouds/
[11] https://www.theregister.com/2026/01/16/rondodox_botnet_hpe_oneview/
[12] https://www.theregister.com/2024/08/07/vulnerable_ssh_implementations_are_everywhere/
[13] https://www.cert.ssi.gouv.fr/actualite/CERTFR-2026-ACT-003/
[14] https://www.cyber.gc.ca/en/alerts-advisories/gnu-security-advisory-av26-047
[15] https://ccb.belgium.be/advisories/warning-critical-authentication-bypass-gnu-inetutils-telnetd-patch-immediately
[16] https://whitepapers.theregister.com/
Re: Who still uses telnet?
Anyone running telnet[d] on the open Internet is asking for trouble, regardless. Unless you are running a honey pot.
But, anonymous FTP is still a thing. You don't need "valuable" credentials to use anonymous FTP. Sure, most connections are now using HTTP, but there is this legacy thing...
Re: Who still uses telnet?
Telnet is still useful in test/development/laboratory environments.
Re: Who still uses telnet?
"Telnet is still useful in test/development/laboratory environments."
And then it's forgotten in Production and a vulnerability is created. Security should be built in from day 1 to make it as hard as possible to compromise.
Web designers deserve to have their lives made as difficult as possible as they're to blame for the abhorrent state of impossible to navigate web sites which are everywhere.
Re: Who still uses telnet?
Are you clear about the distinction between telnet clients and servers? Otherwise it sounds like you are saying that engineers should not use telnet in the lab at all! That would be a remarkable point to make.
Re: Who still uses telnet?
I notice that more than one consumer router, switch and other network devices still run some presumably ancient version of telnetd which conceivably is a real problem.
I imagine the cpu+ram of this type of device were strained to run ssh (even dropbear) so clear text protocols viz http, ftp, telnet were still de rigeur. The hardware is now slightly higher spec'd and able to run sshd but still pretty woeful even for the rockbottom price.
Unless fiddled (securetty?) otherwise old Unix systems didn't permit root login on network ptys but that was probably done in login and not telnetd and the -f flag circumvents this.
Kerberised telnet (and ftp) were a thing but in practice I never encountered any systems so configured. ( [1]Solaris:Kerberos User Commands )
Back in the day I did configure vsftpd to support ftps mostly because some graphical desktop client (filezilla?) supported it on Win and Macs.
[1] https://docs.oracle.com/cd/E19253-01/816-4557/6maosrk3e/index.html
Re: Who still uses telnet?
"And the great unwashed..."
Please, we've had web design companies moan at us as we don't give them ftp access to their client's hosting packages, just sftp.
Re: Who still uses telnet?
The FTP Dæmon is easier and lighter to implement compared to SFTP or FTPS. And anonymous FTP is easier to use client side.
And if the files are not secret (say, a linux ISO) or the files are encrypted at rest (best practice for files with secret info inside), and as long as you have a different channel (say HTTPS) to get SHA-2 (not MD5, SHA-2) signatures for the files*, one can use the FTP Dæmon, client and protocol, warts and all.
* Some FTP clients even automate the SHA-2 checking.
Who uses GNU InetUtils?
It is a shame before announcing this the researchers didn’t do some further work and explore who is using this source code and so also publish a list of vulnerable products.
Ie. Just because it carries a Microsoft, Cisco, etc badge, doesn’t mean the code didn’t come from GNU InetUtils…
Re: Who uses GNU InetUtils?
"Just because it carries a Microsoft, Cisco, etc badge, doesn’t mean the code didn’t come from GNU InetUtils…"✓
Microsoft is probably still using the telnet daemon from bsd 4.2 distribution version (Ok, I will be generous - bsd 4.3. ;)
Re: Who uses GNU InetUtils?
That's the reason it would decent of some of these mega corps to put some money towards upkeep of the GNU code they make vast software with.
They can stick that under risk prevention: if you don't feed the plant it will eventually die.
If the client supply [sic]
Perhaps the subjunctive be overdue a renaissance. Less archaic than telnet, at least...
This is a feature not a bug. GNU's Hurd has anonymous shell logins, this is just their application of that misfeature to something that is Unix (and extant).
Nahh, it's impossibile it escaped for years the billion of eyes...
.... perusing each line of FOSS code every day to ensure freedom.
Surely it's the evil work of the government!
Will they never learn???
I remember when, back in times past, (probably when Y2K was providing lots of employment) and when typing the letters ssh probably meant very someone's keyboard had a stutter, getty accepted -froot and passed it on.
Who still uses telnet?
Telnet has been out of favour due to inherent security issues for decades. Which makes sense to everyone.
On the other hand, virtually every website hosting provider still allows plain FTP, which is just as insecure. And the Great Unwashed happily use it, because they've never even heard of SFTP. Which makes no sense at all.
Sometimes...