Beefy Boxes and Bandwidth Generously Provided by pair Networks
laziness, impatience, and hubris

Re^2: We got hacked again.

by BrowserUk (Pope)
on Nov 20, 2012 at 11:39 UTC ( #1004695=note: print w/replies, xml ) Need Help??

in reply to Re: We got hacked again.
in thread We got hacked again.

You're right about the font.

But the point about authentication stands.

With the rise and rise of 'Social' network sites: 'Computers are making people easier to use everyday'
Examine what is said, not who speaks -- Silence betokens consent -- Love the truth but pardon error.
"Science is about questioning the status quo. Questioning authority".
In the absence of evidence, opinion is indistinguishable from prejudice.

RIP Neil Armstrong

Replies are listed 'Best First'.
Re^3: We got hacked again.
by ColonelPanic (Friar) on Nov 20, 2012 at 13:34 UTC
    Except that this is not a failure of authentication.

    When's the last time you used duct tape on a duct? --Larry Wall
Re^3: We got hacked again.
by mbethke (Hermit) on Nov 21, 2012 at 15:17 UTC

    How would you like people to be authenticated? Like have someone check copies of ID cards whether they say "BrowserUK" before admitting someone? Run soundex or "graphex" on user names before allowing them? Not admitting users unless they can prove ownership of a like-named account on another forum with at least $n posts?

    Can't be "authenticating" as in "checking that the user is actually the owner of the account she's trying to use" as there's nothing wrong with how that's implemented as far as I can see.

Log In?

What's my password?
Create A New User
Node Status?
node history
Node Type: note [id://1004695]
and all is quiet...

How do I use this? | Other CB clients
Other Users?
Others rifling through the Monastery: (5)
As of 2018-06-19 04:07 GMT
Find Nodes?
    Voting Booth?
    Should cpanminus be part of the standard Perl release?

    Results (111 votes). Check out past polls.