General Discussions about LUGNET : 6426


Administrative / General / 6426	6425 \| 6427

Subject:	Re: PW validation (was: Re: Opinions wanted: article rating harmful?)
Newsgroups:	lugnet.admin.general
Date:	Sun, 23 Apr 2000 19:10:17 GMT
Viewed:	3382 times

In lugnet.admin.general, Dan Boger writes: > Todd Lehman wrote: > > > Now, unlike government jackbootedness, we do as consumers have a choice > > > not to use Lugnet... but what exactly is the harm of allowing sucky > > > passwords? > > > > Increased probability of successful brute-force compromises. > > true, but can't you limit the number of attempts to, say, 5 in 30 minutes... > that will make brute force attacks impractical... How without opening an equally dangerous door? --Todd

Message has 1 Reply:

		Re: PW validation (was: Re: Opinions wanted: article rating harmful?)
(...) Well, for a brute force attack to be successful, they have to try 100,000s of passwords... if you limit them to 5 tried every 30 minutes, it's pretty certain that they won't stumble upon the correct password before the password owner dies... (...) (25 years ago, 23-Apr-00, to lugnet.admin.general)

Message is in Reply To:

		Re: PW validation (was: Re: Opinions wanted: article rating harmful?)
(...) true, but can't you limit the number of attempts to, say, 5 in 30 minutes... that will make brute force attacks impractical... :) Dan (25 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
This Message and its Replies on One Page:: Nested: All | Brief | Compact | Dots
Linear: All | Brief | Compact

Custom Search