Horton

Re: Rejecting weak passwords

Dave Page <dpage@pgadmin.org>

View thread View on postgr.es
From: Dave Page <dpage@pgadmin.org>
To: Kevin Grittner <Kevin.Grittner@wicourts.gov>
Cc: Andrew Dunstan <andrew@dunslane.net>, Marko Kreen <markokr@gmail.com>, Magnus Hagander <magnus@hagander.net>, Greg Stark <gsstark@mit.edu>, Bruce Momjian <bruce@momjian.us>, pgsql-hackers <pgsql-hackers@postgresql.org>, Tom Lane <tgl@sss.pgh.pa.us>, mlortiz <mlortiz@uci.cu>, Albe Laurenz <laurenz.albe@wien.gv.at>
Date: 2009-10-14T22:02:24Z
Lists: pgsql-hackers 
On Wed, Oct 14, 2009 at 10:51 PM, Kevin Grittner
<Kevin.Grittner@wicourts.gov> wrote:
> Dave Page <dpage@pgadmin.org> wrote:
>
>> No. Any checks at the client are worthless, as they can be bypassed
>> by 10 minutes worth of simple coding in any of a dozen or more
>> languages.
>
> Well, sure, but we're talking about a client going out of their way to
> wrestle the point of the gun toward their own foot, aren't we?  If
> we're worried about the user compromising their own password, we have
> bigger problems, like that slip of paper in their desk drawer with the
> password written on it.  I mean, I know some of these checklists can
> be pretty brain-dead (I've been on both sides of the RFP process many
> times), but it would seem over the top to say that client-side
> password strength checks aren't OK for the reason you give.

See my previous comment about dates. Check-box items aside, I have
absolutely no desire to try to give the illusion of a security
feature, when in reality any user could easily bypass it.


-- 
Dave Page
EnterpriseDB UK:   http://www.enterprisedb.com