Path: ...!news.mixmin.net!news.swapon.de!fu-berlin.de!uni-berlin.de!individual.net!not-for-mail
From: ted@loft.tnolan.com (Ted Nolan <tednolan>)
Newsgroups: comp.unix.bsd.freebsd.misc
Subject: Re: End-to-end encrypted Talk server
Date: 16 May 2025 15:46:04 GMT
Organization: loft
Lines: 22
Message-ID: <m8p4tsFkcqkU1@mid.individual.net>
References: <100645r$25oq$15@gallifrey.nk.ca> <1007lps$b3f$1@reader1.panix.com>
X-Trace: individual.net V4VphOAzLg/Dut1GKoxa4An8K8c+8Q7LzzkwRORoiAJGR/HSvm
X-Orig-Path: not-for-mail
Cancel-Lock: sha1:KTiblWahxxSbVSjLoIc6qIRE/SE= sha256:POGNBNHfJMTCtTM/rsOWFR1PEJIp5/RqQYuv/e9M7rE=
X-Newsreader: trn 4.0-test76 (Apr 2, 2001)
Bytes: 1484

In article <1007lps$b3f$1@reader1.panix.com>,
Dan Cross <cross@spitfire.i.gajendra.net> wrote:
>In article <100645r$25oq$15@gallifrey.nk.ca>,
>The Doctor <doctor@doctor.nl2k.ab.ca> wrote:
>>Just wondering if  FreeBSD Can do  end-to-end encrypted talk as a server.
>
>
>By "talk" do you mean `talk(1)` etc?  If so, then the answer is
>no, unfortunately.  I don't believe that `talk` or `ntalk` was
>ever a protocol that supported encryption.  Of course, it is
>possible that someone created a local variant at some site that
>did, but if so, it was not widespread.
>
>	- Dan C.
>

Maybe you could dummy up something with stunnel.

I think "talk" is pretty much unused these days though.
-- 
columbiaclosings.com
What's not in Columbia anymore..