General Discussions about LUGNET : Search Results: password


Administrative / General / Search Results: password

Results 241 – 260 of about 520.

Search took 0.00 CPU seconds.

Messages: Full | Brief | Compact

Sort: Prefer Newer | Prefer Older | Best Match

		Re: Password Tips
(...) Easially? (...) Hey, we better enhance the tester to prevent that password, it's kind of sort of easy to remember. <GD&R> Seriously, I like the active anti cracker defense idea a lot better and I think that's the better way to solve the (...) (24 years ago, 28-Sep-00, to lugnet.people, lugnet.admin.general)

password
(score: 0.824)

		Re: Password checks (was: Re: LUGNET Memberships)
(...) No that would work, I wrote down the password you sent me and the two new ones I chose and they are pretty memorable, I hope. Implement something that generates a new password AND wipes out ALL the old ones in one fell swoop. Then send me the (...) (24 years ago, 26-Sep-00, to lugnet.people, lugnet.admin.general)

password
(score: 0.824)

		Reducing fussiness in automated password appraisal
Many people feel that the Member password checks on LUGNET are overly stringent -- that it is too hard to come up with a good password that passes the strength appraisal: (URL) is also comfortable to remember. In anticipation of lowering the (...) (24 years ago, 3-Oct-00, to lugnet.admin.general, lugnet.off-topic.geek, lugnet.people, lugnet.general)

password
(score: 0.823)

		Re: Password checks (was: Re: LUGNET Memberships)
(...) No, I meant exactly that: I didn't think that anyone would ever (a) forget their password or (b) not be able to just go look it up. When you put it in a cookie, you don't even have to remember it beyond that, unless you move to different (...) (24 years ago, 26-Sep-00, to lugnet.people, lugnet.admin.general)

password
(score: 0.822)

		Re: Password checks (was: Re: LUGNET Memberships)
(...) I didn't plan for that. In the beginning, I honestly didn't think that anyone would ever forget their password (or at least not have it written down somewhere that they could find it). I'll have to come up with something. Since the pw's are (...) (24 years ago, 26-Sep-00, to lugnet.people, lugnet.admin.general)

password
(score: 0.822)

		Re: Password checks (was: Re: LUGNET Memberships)
(...) The BrickShelf uses the cookie returned and the ip address that the cookie was issued to for reauthenticate login. Nobody has complained about loosing login yet via multiple proxies (i.e. aol). Also, cookies can be made much more difficult (...) (24 years ago, 25-Sep-00, to lugnet.people, lugnet.admin.general)

password
(score: 0.821)

		Re: Password checks (was: Re: LUGNET Memberships)
(...) As is mine. Todd has one opinion of where that is. Some people think it is too strict. Some are happy. I wonder if any think it is too lenient? (...) I know it is affecting me. Todd sent me a new password and I set two more that hopefully I (...) (24 years ago, 26-Sep-00, to lugnet.people, lugnet.admin.general)

password
(score: 0.821)

		Password checks (was: Re: LUGNET Memberships)
(...) (URL) [...] On the other hand, a server could probably get around that by (...) I'm very tempted to head in that direction. Even not relaxing the strictness of the validator, I think it would be wise. (...) Cooking hacking is the logical place (...) (24 years ago, 25-Sep-00, to lugnet.people, lugnet.admin.general)

password
(score: 0.821)

		Re: Password checks (was: Re: LUGNET Memberships)
(...) But doesn't that make somebody have to log in again if they use any kind of non-static-IP connection -- i.e., a typical dial-up or DHCP connection -- and not limited only to shared proxy servers? If they're on a typical ISP dial-up PPP (...) (24 years ago, 26-Sep-00, to lugnet.people, lugnet.admin.general)

password
(score: 0.821)

		Password crack detection and slowing (was: Re: LUGNET Memberships)
(...) I've been thinking about this more tonight, and reading a bit about SysV semaphores, but I don't have experience with them and I'm finding the docs confusing, especially where Perl is concerned. Anyway, upon further reflection, I wonder if (...) (24 years ago, 26-Sep-00, to lugnet.admin.general, lugnet.off-topic.geek)

password
(score: 0.821)

		Re: Password crack detection and slowing (was: Re: LUGNET Memberships)
(...) Oh! One other thing, duh. An advantage this has over pure semaphores or mutexes is that, since it has a sort of "memory" about how many times an IP address has recent sent a failure, it could easily respond with immediate 403 errors (upon (...) (24 years ago, 26-Sep-00, to lugnet.admin.general, lugnet.off-topic.geek)

password
(score: 0.821)

		Password Tips
(...) I just figured out how to easially pass the LUGNET pw test. Use lots of special characters. This one: ^n).F6'%#*><}{#: scores a whopping 900% with no warnings. Just make sure you throw in a number a lower case letter and an upper case letter (...) (24 years ago, 27-Sep-00, to lugnet.people, lugnet.admin.general)

password
(score: 0.821)

		Re: Password Tips
(...) Gee, that was so funny I almost forgot to laugh. There are plenty of 6-character pw's that you can use that have 5 letters and one number or special character, and plenty of 7-character pw's that you can use that are all lowercase letters. I (...) (24 years ago, 27-Sep-00, to lugnet.people, lugnet.admin.general)

password
(score: 0.821)

		Re: Password Tips
(...) Here's a good one: Long,Term/P1an! Passed with +178% I think I've got the hang of it now. (...) Delaying positive and negative results and temporarally blocking ip's for logins that have too many tries is probably the best way to discourage (...) (24 years ago, 27-Sep-00, to lugnet.admin.general)

password
(score: 0.821)

		(canceled)

password
(score: 0.821)

		Re: Password Tips
[Reposted with corrections. I read the results incorrectly; the basepoint for passing is 100%, not 0%.] (...) I shouldn't be wasting my time disspelling FUD like this, but as long as I said the above, I should really define what I mean by "there are (...) (24 years ago, 27-Sep-00, to lugnet.admin.general)

password
(score: 0.821)

		Re: Password checks (was: Re: LUGNET Memberships)
(...) I agree! In a cookie, you can put complete random garbage that only the authentication server knows how to interpret. And if certain bits contain an index, you can even use a one-time pad or other complex mapping to encrypt the data so that (...) (24 years ago, 27-Sep-00, to lugnet.people, lugnet.admin.general)

password
(score: 0.821)

		Re: Password checks (was: Re: LUGNET Memberships)
(...) Huh? Todd, I hope you meant to write, "I didn't think about dealing with people forgetting their passwords". People forget passwords all the time. That's why so many sites have such ridiculously unsecure password requirements -- so (...) (24 years ago, 26-Sep-00, to lugnet.people, lugnet.admin.general)

password
(score: 0.821)

		Re: Reducing fussiness in automated password appraisal
(...) I'd say level 2 is too easy. My current password doesn't fail until level 8. And one I'm playing with, trying to get the pattern down in my head and with my fingers, gets an outstanding even at level 12. (24 years ago, 8-Oct-00, to lugnet.admin.general)

password
(score: 0.820)

		Re: LUGNET Memberships
Todd Lehman <lehman@javanet.com> wrote in message news:G1zDMo.MIK@lugnet.com... (...) password, (...) I (...) have (...) confusion. (...) ID (...) three (...) (24 years ago, 6-Oct-00, to lugnet.admin.general)

password
(score: 0.820)

More: Next Page >>