IWETHEY v. 0.3.0 | TODO
1,095 registered users | 0 active users | 0 LpH | Statistics
Login | Create New User
IWETHEY Banner

Welcome to IWETHEY!

New how about 4, the way we do it now
doesnt annoy the admin at all I dont think
regards,
daemon
that way too many Iraqis conceived of free society as little more than a mosh pit with grenades. ANDISHEH NOURAEE
clearwater highschool marching band [link|http://www.chstornadoband.org/|http://www.chstornadoband.org/]
New Which is?
1) Run away and not post anymore? :-<
2) Create a new user ID?
3) Get zIWeTheyer drunk at BP Bash and assume their identity?
4) ?

Cheers,
Scott.
New And what would that be?
Because it doesn't fscking work right now. :-P

That would be option #6, anyway, once you tell us how it's *supposed* to work now.
Regards,

-scott anderson

"Welcome to Rivendell, Mr. Anderson..."
New the way it works now
example

ben.tilly
BTilly
broomberg
broom2

etc
now for a large board, assuming you are doing a rewrite, I would do the following
supply a generated key that will show only during initial setup, with instructions to print the key and keep it safe, if a client wants a password reset he must supply the key and the original email address that they signed up with, then allow them to reset it. If they cant remember that combo have them call customer service :-)
regards,
daemon
that way too many Iraqis conceived of free society as little more than a mosh pit with grenades. ANDISHEH NOURAEE
clearwater highschool marching band [link|http://www.chstornadoband.org/|http://www.chstornadoband.org/]
     zIWT meta: Which is better: - (admin) - (66)
         3) -NT - (mmoffitt)
         1) - (jb4) - (3)
             Not for long, at least... -NT - (admin) - (2)
                 Is that a threat?!? -NT - (jb4) - (1)
                     You should know by now... - (admin)
         3, with verification - (Arkadiy) - (29)
             Seconded. -NT - (Yendor)
             NO - (FuManChu) - (27)
                 Er, buh? - (admin) - (3)
                     That's enough of a detriment not to warrant the risk IMO -NT - (FuManChu) - (2)
                         ? -NT - (admin) - (1)
                             ?? -NT - (drewk)
                 Yeah - (Yendor) - (11)
                     How is that insecure? - (FuManChu) - (2)
                         You're unclear on this. - (admin) - (1)
                             See below. -NT - (FuManChu)
                     You only need one field labeled "Hint" - (tuberculosis) - (7)
                         Sure... - (Yendor) - (6)
                             Bah. - (admin)
                             Not quite - (FuManChu) - (4)
                                 And my point is... - (Yendor) - (3)
                                     I have a standard formula I use for passwords. - (folkert) - (2)
                                         I also have a standard formula - (daemon) - (1)
                                             Ding, Ding, Ding. - (folkert)
                 It's only insecure if the user is allowed to proceed - (imric) - (10)
                     Bah. Risk is the issue. - (FuManChu) - (9)
                         So what's YOUR suggestion? -NT - (admin) - (4)
                             Unfortunately for you #1 ;) - (FuManChu) - (3)
                                 WTF? - (admin) - (2)
                                     Sorry. You're right. I didn't read carefully. - (FuManChu) - (1)
                                         So how does that change your answer? - (admin)
                         Same risk than we have now during login. - (imric) - (2)
                             Same outcome, different risk--the attack surface has doubled -NT - (FuManChu)
                             Not mine. - (CRConrad)
                         Can we please weight the risks - (Arkadiy)
         3) with some safeguards? - (Another Scott)
         4) WikiWay: everything wide open ... muuuaaaahahahahahaha -NT - (drewk) - (1)
             Shaddap wid' yer shaddin' ap... -NT - (admin)
         3 with a "what is your dog's name?" thingie -NT - (Silverlock)
         I'll join Ark, Scott(2), Don(Silverback), and YendorMike: 3+ - (CRConrad) - (2)
             <raises hand> on that last bit. :-) -NT - (Another Scott)
             Aye - 3) with - (imric)
         Another few options: - (admin) - (9)
             I'd rather not vote on solutions until we discuss risks - (FuManChu) - (8)
                 Re: I'd rather not vote on solutions until we discuss risks - (admin) - (7)
                     Okay, start with costs of current proposals - (FuManChu) - (3)
                         Missed the point. :-) - (admin) - (2)
                             Understood, but you're use case #1 - (FuManChu) - (1)
                                 I can do private keys... - (folkert)
                     What do you want the software to do? - (Another Scott) - (2)
                         Nope, wrong - (drewk) - (1)
                             Yes, a *good* challenge question would be needed. - (Another Scott)
         how about 4, the way we do it now - (daemon) - (3)
             Which is? - (Another Scott)
             And what would that be? - (admin) - (1)
                 the way it works now - (daemon)
         How about 5... - (jb4)
         16) Storing them encrypted with a "reset my password" featur - (folkert)
         A variation on 2) - (altmann)
         3), with a question 1st. -NT - (broomberg)
         3 with a proviso - (ChrisR) - (1)
             I like that! -NT - (Arkadiy)
         3. Puts the onus of keeping valid email address on user. -NT - (a6l6e6x)
         3 -NT - (pwhysall)
         6. - (static)
         "zIWT meta: Which is better:" Voting/Ratification (new thread) - (folkert)

The Men In Black have been bendin' my ear.
169 ms