Re: Rejecting weak passwords - Mailing list pgsql-hackers

From Kevin Grittner
Subject Re: Rejecting weak passwords
Date
Msg-id 4AD60187020000250002B964@gw.wicourts.gov
Whole thread Raw
In response to Re: Rejecting weak passwords  (Dave Page <dpage@pgadmin.org>)
Responses Re: Rejecting weak passwords  (Dave Page <dpage@pgadmin.org>)
List pgsql-hackers
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.
-Kevin


pgsql-hackers by date:

Previous
From: "Kevin Grittner"
Date:
Subject: Re: Rejecting weak passwords
Next
From: Josh Berkus
Date:
Subject: Re: Could regexp_matches be immutable?