Subject:
|
Re: PW validation (was: Re: Opinions wanted: article rating harmful?)
|
Newsgroups:
|
lugnet.admin.general
|
Date:
|
Sun, 23 Apr 2000 00:51:38 GMT
|
Viewed:
|
2874 times
|
| |
|
|
In lugnet.admin.general, Richard Franks writes:
> In lugnet.admin.general, Todd Lehman writes:
>
> > having a password validator that doesn't suck is IMHO a fundamental
> > prerequisite to allowing passwords to be changed. Anything less is
> > irresponsible.
So are you going to enforce that people HAVE to set their passwords to things
that the validator feels don't suck, or are you going to give advice but allow
it anyway?
The former is rather draconian for a site that doesn't handle money. I've asked
this question before but didn't get a clear answer, I don't feel.
++Lar
|
|
Message has 2 Replies:
Message is in Reply To:
309 Messages in This Thread:
(Inline display suppressed due to large size. Click Dots below to view.)
- Entire Thread on One Page:
- Nested:
All | Brief | Compact | Dots
Linear:
All | Brief | Compact
This Message and its Replies on One Page:
- Nested:
All | Brief | Compact | Dots
Linear:
All | Brief | Compact
|
|
|
|
