General Discussions about LUGNET : Search Results: password


Administrative / General / Search Results: password

Results 261 – 280 of 524.

Search took 0.01 CPU seconds.

Messages: Full | Brief | Compact

Sort: Prefer Newer | Prefer Older | Best Match

		Re: LUGNET Memberships
Todd Lehman <lehman@javanet.com> wrote in message news:G1EAr4.F49@lugnet.com... (...) stuff, (...) primary (...) send (...) one (...) Oh, hi Todd. I should have checked this NG before emailing you... Anyway, I emailed you about <thinking> 5 (?) (...) (24 years ago, 5-Oct-00, to lugnet.people, lugnet.admin.general)

password
(score: 0.183)

		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: 0.183)

		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: 0.183)

		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: 0.183)

		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: 0.183)

		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: 0.183)

		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: 0.183)

		Re: LUGNET Memberships
(...) I was thinking more from the perspective of what you are going to create that will have a span of 9 months and not what might happen on the internet outside of LUGNET in 9 months. This still doesn't explain why you have a sophisticated (...) (24 years ago, 28-Sep-00, to lugnet.people, lugnet.admin.general)

password
(score: 0.183)

		Re: LUGNET Memberships
(...) Have you forgotten your password? If so, write me an email from your primary address and I can now ask the server to generate a new one for you and send it directly to you via e-mail. You could think of it as a temporary new one which you (...) (24 years ago, 24-Sep-00, to lugnet.people, lugnet.admin.general)

password
(score: 0.183)

		Re: pw checking (was: Re: LUGNET Memberships)
Todd Lehman <lehman@javanet.com> wrote in message news:G1L15F.K94@lugnet.com... [snip] (...) client (...) if (...) to (...) been (...) reason. (...) follow (...) it (...) Why would it have been a mistake to protect them? IMHO, if anyone can fake a (...) (24 years ago, 28-Sep-00, to lugnet.admin.general)

password
(score: 0.183)

		Re: LUGNET Memberships
(...) University of Oxford. <ftp://ftp.ox.ac.uk/...rdlists/>. Wordlists have non-password related uses too, apparently. :) (24 years ago, 26-Sep-00, to lugnet.people, lugnet.admin.general)

password
(score: 0.183)

		pw checking (was: Re: LUGNET Memberships)
(...) Well, enough new things that I think it will be hard for anyone to continue belittling the checking anymore. Plus, as I said before, it's possible (and likely, I hope) that the checking will be less stringent. Right now I'm guesstimating that (...) (24 years ago, 28-Sep-00, to lugnet.people, lugnet.admin.general)

password
(score: 0.183)

		Re: LUGNET Memberships
(...) Of course not -- because that's patently false. Uhhh, if you chronically have trouble remembering good passwords, you should be writing them down and putting them somewhere safe that you trust -- like your dresser drawer at home, or a (...) (24 years ago, 24-Sep-00, to lugnet.people, lugnet.admin.general)

password
(score: 0.183)

		Re: LUGNET Memberships
(...) Wouldn't it be easier to e-mail the forgotten password to the e-mail address your members input upon registration? That e-mail could be intercepted but I don't think a lot of people would go into that kind of trouble to be able to look at (...) (24 years ago, 24-Sep-00, to lugnet.people, lugnet.admin.general)

password
(score: 0.183)

		Re: LUGNET Memberships
"Todd Lehman" <lehman@javanet.com> wrote in message news:G1HDIu.J6p@lugnet.com... (...) other (...) I (...) So ... are you going to tell us what is going to happen nine months from now or just leave us hanging? IMHO, the password checker and system (...) (24 years ago, 26-Sep-00, to lugnet.people, lugnet.admin.general)

password
(score: 0.183)

		Re: LUGNET Memberships
(...) Imagine it is all you can do, as Todd didn't actually do the typing, he said he got lists of words readily available from the 'net that are made available (by whom?) to aid in building stronger password checkers. (and also to aid in building (...) (24 years ago, 26-Sep-00, to lugnet.people, lugnet.admin.general)

password
(score: 0.182)

		Re: LUGNET Memberships
(...) Probably the latter. But maybe (tying threads together) we could have Todd print a bar code that we swiped with our :CueCats to verify it was us (along with a rather easier password that we had to remember) ?? Personally I think one should (...) (24 years ago, 25-Sep-00, to lugnet.admin.general, lugnet.off-topic.geek)

password
(score: 0.182)

		Re: LUGNET Memberships
Hi there! Excuse me if i am totally lost here... Is it not so that a 6 letter password containing letters from A to Z and 0 to 9, can have 36^6 different combinations and contains 48 bits in a unique order? A binary value containing 0 or 1 in 8 (...) (24 years ago, 25-Sep-00, to lugnet.people, lugnet.admin.general)

password
(score: 0.182)

		Re: LUGNET Memberships
(...) ouch. How easy is it for a thief to get your customer number? How many digits is your PIN? (...) natch. :) (...) Disable accounts on repeated fails and you make it trivial to DoS someone. Disable IP addresses and you lock out the innocent on (...) (24 years ago, 25-Sep-00, to lugnet.people, lugnet.admin.general)

password
(score: 0.182)

		Re: LUGNET Memberships
(...) If I send an extra $10, can I get a new packet of LUGNET membership stuff, most importantly my password? Chris (24 years ago, 24-Sep-00, to lugnet.people, lugnet.admin.general)

password
(score: 0.182)

More: Next Page >>