Subject:
|
Re: PW validation (was: Re: Opinions wanted: article rating harmful?)
|
Newsgroups:
|
lugnet.admin.general
|
Date:
|
Mon, 24 Apr 2000 04:22:23 GMT
|
Viewed:
|
3272 times
|
| |
|
|
From the last two posts, I think I have arrived at my own conclusion on this
matter. Todd wants to protect his hard earned work by issuing complicated
passwords that theoretically cannot be hacked. I can't blame Todd for this
notion, it seems to make a great deal of sense. Larry, on the other hand,
wants to name his password, and he should be allowed to do so. Todd fears
that not all Lugnet users are as sophisticated as Larry, and someone will
name a password that is easily breached. Again, this seems to make a great
deal of sense. While bad for Larry (and many other Lugnet Members), Todd
can protect his network by using these methods. Unfortunately, this leads
me to the conclusion that there is no need for me to become a member! (bad
for Todd). I am not a member, I have no password, and none of this
discussion applies to me. Furthermore, I read Lugnet with a newsreader! As
many people do, I suspect.
What happens next? How does Todd attract me (and other sophisticated users)
to use the web interface and deal with passwords, etc? From where I sit, I
don't think it can be done. Either cut off newsreader access (bad), or
allow folks to name their passwords (bad according to Todd).
This is becoming *way* too complicated. Let me have my newsreader access
without making me feel like I am left out because I choose not to use the
web interface.
Sorry for trouncing your web playground Todd, but that is how I see it.
Build On!
John Matthews
(plans on contributing to the great effort known as LUGnet, just wants
something other than a moving target)
Larry Pieniazek <lar@voyager.net> wrote in message
news:FtHxnL.8r2@lugnet.com...
> In lugnet.admin.general, Todd Lehman writes:
>
> > I take it as a given that most people
>
> but not all. I don't.
>
> > will still write a password down
> > somewhere no matter how easy or difficult it is for them to remember (if • they
> > feel that password is important) just in case they might forget it. Even • if
> > most people don't, it certainly doesn't alarm me one bit knowing that • some
> > people would -- and do.
> >
> > Maybe they write it down backwards, or shifted by one letter, or • letter-case
> > flopped,
>
> I doubt most people that write down passwords apply any of these cyphers • to
> them but I am just speculating on this particular point.
>
> > or even raw, but it's still safer for them and for LUGNET if they
> > keep a written record of it in a safe place (such as their wallet or • purse
> > or bureau at home) than if they have a weak password which could be • guessed
> > at from any of 100 million nodes on the Internet.
>
> Fascinating... can you provide a reference for this assertion, or is it • just
> conjecture? Keeping ATM passwords in one's wallet or purse is a • particularly
> bad practice, for example. But then, we're talking about something rather
> different than money, aren't we?
>
> ++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
|
|
|
|
