Subject:
|
Re: PW validation (was: Re: Opinions wanted: article rating harmful?)
|
Newsgroups:
|
lugnet.admin.general
|
Date:
|
Sun, 23 Apr 2000 19:51:24 GMT
|
Viewed:
|
3089 times
|
| |
|
|
In lugnet.admin.general, Anders Isaksson writes:
> Todd Lehman skrev i meddelandet ...
> > In lugnet.admin.general, Larry Pieniazek writes:
> > > So are you going to enforce that people HAVE to set their passwords to
> > > things that the validator feels don't suck,
> >
> > That is its purpose.
>
> I think that's unwise (to _force_ people to use an acknowledged pw). Two
> reasons:
>
> - one cannot choose a password that is easy to remember --> it will be
> written down in some easy accessible place.
Can't or won't?
> - by disallowing some passwords, you are limiting the number of possible
> passwords, i.e. you are making a brute force attack easier.
I don't believe that's the case.
http://www.lugnet.com/admin/general/?n=5788
> - the refutation of a password makes the customer irritated, especially if
> there's no _obvious_ (to the customer) reason.
I may have to make a short FAQ page.
> Test for a minimum length, and force a mix of letters (upper and lower case)
> and numbers/special characters, and it will be good enough.
SW:Ep1
M:Tron6989
70'sLEGO
2*4Brick
Pi3.14159
12:34Sunday
--Todd
|
|
Message has 3 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
|
|
|
|
