Hey, C.B.! Proving that Wisconsinites know how to party, eh? Would be nice to have a beer out on the ice with you. :)

--KK

I was lurking for at least a year before registering, I believe. If I'm someplace with access to my own computer, I will typically visit at least once per day. Oh, the hours you owe me, Slashdot! ;)

Virtually no effort, yeah. But then, at least according to this guy, the password policy should restrict strlen(password) to be no greater than strlen(hashval). *eyeroll*

Apparently, then, it's far too difficult for the Hotmail folks to actually use hashing algorithms? Otherwise, why would they limit your password length? Are their hashing algorithms being executed with a stack of punchcards that some intern has to feed into the hopper?

Please go further to defend this absurdity.

I know you're trolling hard, but I'll bite anyhow. Some people reading here might (gasp!) actually agree with your drivel.

Here's the problem: they shouldn't be storing the password. They should be storing a HASH (that's a one-way function). Storing plaintext passwords is bad, m'kay?

Considering the provider, the infrastructure, the advertising dollars they make, etc. I think I'd expect more from Hotmail than I would the crappy POP3 account I might get from Charter (*blech*). Are you saying that because it's "free" (again, advertising dollars), it shouldn't be secure? Are you also saying that people don't have a right to ask for the simplest of security?

Again demonstrating you don't understand decent hashing algorithms. Here's an exercise for you: pick any widely-used hashing algorithm (des, md5, sha-*, etc.) and then create a 100+ char string. Run that string through each of the hashing algorithms. Measure the length of the output (L) from each. Now feed the first L characters of your original 100+ char string into the same hashing algorithms again, and tell me if there's any difference in output.

Go ahead, I'll wait.

And finally, let's state the obvious: Limiting the password lengths also reduces the keyspace. See Brute-force attack.

Shhhh! "Job Creation".

Where'd you copy this from? It's called the Book of Revelation. There is no "s".

I happen to know two people who were. They advocate for it.

Aside from the fact that CD jewel cases aren't very well designed... I'm right-handed and open CDs exactly the same way you do. My "handedness" never occurred to me while using them.

Does your right-handed friend also open the cover of books across his body with his right hand?

On the other hand, I recall seeing a video a short time ago in which a person volunteered to be zip-tied so they could demonstrate breaking them. It seemed to consist of getting your wrists beneath your backside and forcefully squatting down to snap them. I could be recalling the details wrong, but you can surely find a youtube video of people demonstrating this technique that would presumably not work with handcuffs unless they were already materially compromised in some way.

Oooh, you were SO close. No, I think the best would be to take the "Thomas Crowne Affair" approach. Invite a few dozen Assange look-alikes to the embassy. Put them all in identical clothing, maybe some makeup (including the real Slim Shady), and send them each out in cars with untinted windows in 15 minute intervals. Send Assange out in car #10 or something like that.

I understand that the most frequent rebuttal to the "look how Israel does it" argument is that their solution couldn't scale up to the magnitude of the USA air travel infrastructure. This seems like a plausible counter-argument, though I don't know much about such things. (for the record, TSA & Patriot Act suck)

What are you on about with the "you guys" perspective? I don't know who you think you're fooling. It only takes one read of your post and one can deduce from the assortment of grammar and punctuation errors that you're surely a product of the American educational system.

... die by the sword, obviously.

From TFS:

(emphasis mine)

I don't see why it can't be both. I think maybe it's a combination of poor management and cognitive dissonance that leads some to cheer the loudest for projects even if they're failing hard. I think we've probably all seen this phenomenon.