To LUGNET HomepageTo LUGNET News HomepageTo LUGNET Guide Homepage
 Help on Searching
 
Post new message to lugnet.admin.generalOpen lugnet.admin.general in your NNTP NewsreaderTo LUGNET News Traffic PageSign In (Members)
 Administrative / General / 6445
6444  |  6446
Subject: 
Re: PW validation (was: Re: Opinions wanted: article rating harmful?)
Newsgroups: 
lugnet.admin.general
Date: 
Sun, 23 Apr 2000 21:45:17 GMT
Highlighted: 
! (details)
Viewed: 
3072 times
  
In lugnet.admin.general, Todd Lehman writes:

SW:Ep1
M:Tron6989
70'sLEGO
2*4Brick
Pi3.14159
12:34Sunday

NONE of those are bad passwords for the level of security that LUGNET, now, or
ever, (2) will require.

To think differently implies that either there is something far far deeper and
earth shatteringly important about to happen at some point (2), or that there
is a bit of excessive paranoia at work somewhere. People who really don't want
their ID's hacked should use better ones, of course, but J. Random AFOL would
be well served by any of these.

1 -  based on what has been revealed publicly

2 - which may be the case, but how would *we* know... Only Todd does.

++Lar



Message is in Reply To:
  Re: PW validation (was: Re: Opinions wanted: article rating harmful?)
 
(...) Can't or won't? (...) I don't believe that's the case. (URL) - the refutation of a password makes the customer irritated, especially if (...) I may have to make a short FAQ page. (...) SW:Ep1 M:Tron6989 70'sLEGO 2*4Brick Pi3.14159 12:34Sunday (...) (24 years ago, 23-Apr-00, to lugnet.admin.general)

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
    

Custom Search

©2005 LUGNET. All rights reserved. - hosted by steinbruch.info GbR