Subject:
|
PW validation (was: Re: Opinions wanted: article rating harmful?)
|
Newsgroups:
|
lugnet.admin.general
|
Date:
|
Fri, 21 Apr 2000 21:30:05 GMT
|
Viewed:
|
2604 times
|
| |
|
|
In lugnet.admin.general, Larry Pieniazek writes:
> > Sorry if you feel the password checker is useless.
>
> Useless was a bit harsh, sorry... let's just call it less useful than quite
> a few other things, and more useful than a few other things.
Fair enough.
> And clearly you enjoyed doing it
Not really. Wish I hadn't had to.
> and enjoyed that other people enjoyed playing with it.
Not really, no. It's not intended as a toy or a means of entertainment.
I enjoyed getting feedback on aspects of it to the extent that getting
useful feedback is enjoyable.
> Nothing wrong with geeking out on low priority things, after all.
> For if that were so, all of us would be better served doing our real work
> 100% of the time instead of enjoying our hobby, eh?
Not sure what/if you are insinuating between the lines there, or whether I
should feel insulted by that comment, but having a password validator that
doesn't suck is IMHO a fundamental prerequisite to allowing passwords to be
changed. Anything less is irresponsible. (Yes, I know, allowing too much
time to pass before facilitating the change of passwords is also arguably
irresponsible, but it's a much lesser maximum risk.)
Can we drop this argument?
--Todd
|
|
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
|
|
|
|
