This sounds like a really good technique because in real life people are unlikely to know which book you have these written in and steal it from you, unless you are constantly using the book in front of people. If I were using this technique I would not tell my coworkers that I was doing so and I would try to avoid using the book in front of them.
One nice feature is that if the book is stolen, or you suspect it has been stolen, you can change the passwords - provided you can change them without knowing them. The weak point is that if you lose the book, you might have problems remembering the passwords. But perhaps you are like me and don't lose things that you use frequently.
I think biometrics is bad because once it is breached, you can't change it. It is still subject to many kinds of attacks (replay attack for example.)
At least with passwords, I can change the password to something new.
Re:as usual, blame the users for trying
on
Too Many Passwords
·
· Score: 1
until the lesson starts to sink in to admins' heads, I say keep 'em coming!
OK. But what exactly is the lesson? You're damned if you do and damned if you don't?
Re:Better than post-it notes
on
Too Many Passwords
·
· Score: 2, Informative
I have heard that 2 short unrelated words with a number in between them that is not 2 or 4 is pretty secure against dictionary attacks and much more easy to remember than giberish.
I totally disagree. I think it is a bad analogy. You have a right to speak, but I have no obligation to listen. Blogs exercise the former but do not violate the later. Spam violates the later. If search engines are being clogged with uninteresting results, then the engines should be improved.
What you are arguing is like saying the library should only have comic books because that's all you want to read.
Yes, there are alternatives to eating unhealthy food ingredients. However, they require lots of vigilence, additional expense, and a constant reexamination of one's diet. Just because a product does not contain a substance you want to avoid is no guarentee that the manufacturer will not change the ingredient at any time. As for non-manufactured foods, you often have no idea what kinds of chemicals are used in their production unless you buy organic which is expensive and sometimes hard to find.
Except for all the chemicals the government has rather arbitrarily decided you aren't allowed to put into your own body.
I am much more concerned with the chemicals that the goverment has decided should be in my body. What I mean by this is pollution, waste from chemical factories, price supports for certain food products with certain additives (milk with hormones added, high fructose corn syrrup, etc.) ADM basically makes a bunch of food additives that aren't good for you and are mostly put into products because of goverment regulations and price supports.
I am also opposed to the current "war on drugs". I think it does a lot of harm to our society. But I also think the government could easily end meth use if they really wanted to. I think they allow it to exist because someone makes money off of it. Same with a lot of other kinds of crime (auto theft, illegal immigration, burgalary, etc.)
You are exactly right. There are people who think that imposing democracy will work because the US and Britain did it in World War II. However, what we really did was restore democracy to countries that were basically democratic to begin with.
Except Japan and I'm not sure how or why the US was successful in helping the Japanese become democratic. Is there a lesson that can be learned from Japan and applied to Iraq perhaps? Or did Japan have a pre-war democratic history that I am not aware of?
You make a wonderful point. When I look at all of the problems caused by the various religions (Islamic Terrorism, Christian Anti-Science, Wacky Scientology cults, etc.), I often think that religion in general should be outlawed. I don't see how it is compatible with civilized living. Plus, there are a number of very nice countries that have outlawed nazism, so I don't see how outlawing religion would be all that different.
I feel the same way you do regarding the fear that China is advancing economically without giving political freedoms. I think a lot of thinking people in the US have assumed you cannot have economic development without political freedom and are now shocked by what is happening in China.
I hope that we're wrong and that China's authoritarian government cannot last.
You must be from someplace civilized. I read about a case in Oklahoma where they were going to try two boys who were 7 and 9 as adults (in a murder case).
Well, how about the Bricklin, for one? I mean, sheesh, that little beauty could travel in time!
There's just no way I would drive a 20+ year old car. I like to actually arrive at my destination. The second sentance in your post seems to refer to the De Lorean which is a different car (though similar looking).
Now, if I could get a Peel 50, that would be cool.
Social Welfare - I think some of these programs work OK. I have no problem with Social Security. I only have problems with programs that just give out free money to lazy people. Privatizing these programs is, however, far worse because its basically just a give away to investment firms.
Foreign Policy - The republican foreign policies have been *disasterous* (i.e. betraying our allies in Taiwan, Gulf War I, Gulf War II, Iran/Contra, etc). Sometimes democrat policies have been too (Vietnam, Foreign Aid Programs), but at least the democrats have had some foreign policy wins (Marshall Plan).
Fiscal Policy - Between "tax and spend" and "borrow and spend", I prefer the former, as the eventual financial collapse of the US federal government will likely be unpleasant.
Economic Protectionism - I haven't noticed that the democrats have been protectionists. The only difference between the two parties, is the democrats usually try to make our trading partners agree to some minimal amounts of worker protection whereas the republicans say "How can I rig the law to help big business?"
Affirmative Action - I don't think this policy matters one way or the other. It hasn't made much of a difference that I can see.
Liberty - You are against liberty? You would prefer some kind of totalitarianism?
Are you implying there are better cars made by small companies that we have all overlooked because of the car-industrial complex has manipulated the media into not telling us about it?
Which cars in your opinion should we all be taking another look at?
OK, but before I asked I didn't even know which planet someone might argue wasn't a planet. I had guessed that it was probably either Pluto, Mercury, Earth, or somehow had something to do with the asteroid belt.
Slashdot Mirror
This sounds like a really good technique because in real life people are unlikely to know which book you have these written in and steal it from you, unless you are constantly using the book in front of people. If I were using this technique I would not tell my coworkers that I was doing so and I would try to avoid using the book in front of them.
One nice feature is that if the book is stolen, or you suspect it has been stolen, you can change the passwords - provided you can change them without knowing them. The weak point is that if you lose the book, you might have problems remembering the passwords. But perhaps you are like me and don't lose things that you use frequently.
This technique is still vulnerable to a dictionary attack.
I think biometrics is bad because once it is breached, you can't change it. It is still subject to many kinds of attacks (replay attack for example.)
At least with passwords, I can change the password to something new.
until the lesson starts to sink in to admins' heads, I say keep 'em coming!
OK. But what exactly is the lesson? You're damned if you do and damned if you don't?
I have heard that 2 short unrelated words with a number in between them that is not 2 or 4 is pretty secure against dictionary attacks and much more easy to remember than giberish.
I totally disagree. I think it is a bad analogy. You have a right to speak, but I have no obligation to listen. Blogs exercise the former but do not violate the later. Spam violates the later. If search engines are being clogged with uninteresting results, then the engines should be improved.
What you are arguing is like saying the library should only have comic books because that's all you want to read.
Yes, there are alternatives to eating unhealthy food ingredients. However, they require lots of vigilence, additional expense, and a constant reexamination of one's diet. Just because a product does not contain a substance you want to avoid is no guarentee that the manufacturer will not change the ingredient at any time. As for non-manufactured foods, you often have no idea what kinds of chemicals are used in their production unless you buy organic which is expensive and sometimes hard to find.
Right. We were a lot worse off when there were manufacturing jobs in the US.
Except for all the chemicals the government has rather arbitrarily decided you aren't allowed to put into your own body.
I am much more concerned with the chemicals that the goverment has decided should be in my body. What I mean by this is pollution, waste from chemical factories, price supports for certain food products with certain additives (milk with hormones added, high fructose corn syrrup, etc.) ADM basically makes a bunch of food additives that aren't good for you and are mostly put into products because of goverment regulations and price supports.
I am also opposed to the current "war on drugs". I think it does a lot of harm to our society. But I also think the government could easily end meth use if they really wanted to. I think they allow it to exist because someone makes money off of it. Same with a lot of other kinds of crime (auto theft, illegal immigration, burgalary, etc.)
You are exactly right. There are people who think that imposing democracy will work because the US and Britain did it in World War II. However, what we really did was restore democracy to countries that were basically democratic to begin with.
Except Japan and I'm not sure how or why the US was successful in helping the Japanese become democratic. Is there a lesson that can be learned from Japan and applied to Iraq perhaps? Or did Japan have a pre-war democratic history that I am not aware of?
You make a wonderful point. When I look at all of the problems caused by the various religions (Islamic Terrorism, Christian Anti-Science, Wacky Scientology cults, etc.), I often think that religion in general should be outlawed. I don't see how it is compatible with civilized living. Plus, there are a number of very nice countries that have outlawed nazism, so I don't see how outlawing religion would be all that different.
I have a right - to party!
I feel the same way you do regarding the fear that China is advancing economically without giving political freedoms. I think a lot of thinking people in the US have assumed you cannot have economic development without political freedom and are now shocked by what is happening in China.
I hope that we're wrong and that China's authoritarian government cannot last.
Apparently they had murdered their father who was sexually molesting and abusing them while he was asleep. It took both of them to hold the shotgun.
You must be from someplace civilized. I read about a case in Oklahoma where they were going to try two boys who were 7 and 9 as adults (in a murder case).
Well, how about the Bricklin, for one? I mean, sheesh, that little beauty could travel in time!
There's just no way I would drive a 20+ year old car. I like to actually arrive at my destination. The second sentance in your post seems to refer to the De Lorean which is a different car (though similar looking).
Now, if I could get a Peel 50, that would be cool.
Social Welfare - I think some of these programs work OK. I have no problem with Social Security. I only have problems with programs that just give out free money to lazy people. Privatizing these programs is, however, far worse because its basically just a give away to investment firms.
Foreign Policy - The republican foreign policies have been *disasterous* (i.e. betraying our allies in Taiwan, Gulf War I, Gulf War II, Iran/Contra, etc). Sometimes democrat policies have been too (Vietnam, Foreign Aid Programs), but at least the democrats have had some foreign policy wins (Marshall Plan).
Fiscal Policy - Between "tax and spend" and "borrow and spend", I prefer the former, as the eventual financial collapse of the US federal government will likely be unpleasant.
Economic Protectionism - I haven't noticed that the democrats have been protectionists. The only difference between the two parties, is the democrats usually try to make our trading partners agree to some minimal amounts of worker protection whereas the republicans say "How can I rig the law to help big business?"
Affirmative Action - I don't think this policy matters one way or the other. It hasn't made much of a difference that I can see.
Liberty - You are against liberty? You would prefer some kind of totalitarianism?
According to the RIAA, if a child borrows a book from a library, we should execute them.
Are you implying there are better cars made by small companies that we have all overlooked because of the car-industrial complex has manipulated the media into not telling us about it?
Which cars in your opinion should we all be taking another look at?
OK, but before I asked I didn't even know which planet someone might argue wasn't a planet. I had guessed that it was probably either Pluto, Mercury, Earth, or somehow had something to do with the asteroid belt.
7. You are of the opinion that there are only 8 planets in the solar system.
What does this refer to? Do some astronomers think one of the planets is technically a comet or something?
Yeah, you can see all angles of Jar Jar.
Can they not use multiple stations to make it appear the signal is coming from a place where it is not?
That's exactly what the communists said as they closed the democratic newspapers.
The difference between a republic and a people's republic is the same as the difference between a jacket and a straight jacket.