Comment On Sorry, You Used That Password 28,452 Times Ago

18770 is nothing, you should see what the Microsoft employees have to do to log in at work!

Msgina.dll :P

The idea of a 30,000 word password isn't all that bad. You could use your favourite book, and copy/paste it into the er...textfield?

Maybe an upload.

I guess it would be easier to use a unique image.

That "illicit feedback" must be catching - I saw the same phrase in an email from Microsoft recently.

English is a crazy language

gilleain:

The idea of a 30,000 word password isn't all that bad. You could use your favourite book

Unfortunately, from a password strength perspective, this would have about the same entropy as the book's ISBN. :-P

Another gem from that same support document: Note that the number of required characters changes from 17,145 to 18,770 with the installation of SP1.

I find the last one rather ironic. The last thing that users of this site should be submitting is errors in word choice and grammar.

In programming, you may spend days trying to find a misplaced semi-colon.

When logging in, you may spend months of company-time plus the support crew's time finding a misplaced w.

ParkinT:

English is a crazy language

While I agree with the general assertion that English has some wacky facets to it, he's lumping grammar, spelling, etymology and idioms together. I can't take him seriously.

Also a WTF:

What kind of requirements elicitation process has eliciting feedback as "optional"?

unklegwar:

I find the last one rather ironic. The last thing that users of this site should be submitting is errors in word choice and grammar.

And by a guy who spells his name "Brien", no less. (Just kidding, man, don't take it personelly.)

fanguad:

ParkinT:

English is a crazy language

While I agree with the general assertion that English has some wacky facets to it, he's lumping grammar, spelling, etymology and idioms together. I can't take him seriously.

You're not supposed to. See how it's filed under the "humor" directory?

AC:

gilleain:

The idea of a 30,000 word password isn't all that bad. You could use your favourite book

Unfortunately, from a password strength perspective, this would have about the same entropy as the book's ISBN. :-P

How about my favorite book with one comma missing?

-Harrow.

awt:

That "illicit feedback" must be catching - I saw the same phrase in an email from Microsoft recently.

Nah. It's just the new policy: They set the requirements and users accept them.

Users that insist upon commenting are clearly in violation of this new policy...hence these would be "illicit user comments".

I'm only wondering where these numbers come from. Examples like this one have been seen on WTF but those where rounding errors or overflows or whatever. Now, how does this relate to a password strategy. Obviously something went wrong, but what?

gilleain:

I guess it would be easier to use a unique image.

Thats not a bad idea for something... Do some accounts require a password AND an image?

Are we running short of material or what? That MS one is pretty desparate. Since when has it been "good enough" to post a link to a bug report/KB article/FAQ entry that merely describes a bug, rather than a graphic of the requester (or whatever) showing the actual bug itself? Hell, if that's what passes for humour these days:

http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla

Go ahead, knock yourself out. Sheesh, pathetic! Even the trivial homonym typo ('illicit' for 'elicit') is funnier than that.

BlueXero:

gilleain:

I guess it would be easier to use a unique image.

Thats not a bad idea for something... Do some accounts require a password AND an image?

Yes, that's what we call "Wish-It-Was Two-Factor Authentication."

unklegwar:

I find the last one rather ironic. The last thing that users of this site should be submitting is errors in word choice and grammar.

I think that's the "worse than failure" meme in action. Until I read the comments, I (and probably you) didn't catch the fact that they used "illicit" (illegal, unlawful, bad) instead of "elicit" (to ask for).

I just assumed that the instructions told what to do if the user supplied invalid feedback, and used the word "illicit" instead of "invalid" becauses they wanted to sound fancy.

Therefore, it passed my mental validity check... which is the definition of "Worse Than Failure". It "works", but really doesn't.

RobertB:

Therefore, it passed my mental validity check... which is the definition of "Worse Than Failure". It "works", but really doesn't.

Thankfully, illicit user feedback is also optional. Users don't have to produce contraband comments!

I think I've seen that first one before. It's Kerebos isn't it? And I'm sure I saw it at this site.

Yeah, I saw that. And oh by the way, it's never optional. Unless you intend to quit your job the day the product launches.

BBT:

Also a WTF:

What kind of requirements elicitation process has eliciting feedback as "optional"?

Darn it, meant to quote this with my above comment.

BBT:

Also a WTF:

What kind of requirements elicitation process has eliciting feedback as "optional"?

Darn it, meant to quote this with my above comment.

DaveK:

Sheesh, pathetic! Even the trivial homonym typo ('illicit' for 'elicit') is funnier than that.

Typing 'illicit' for 'elicit' isn't a typo. It means you used the wrong word because you assumed there was only one word with that general sound. Oops. I think the use of 'elude' for 'allude' is a more common manifestation.

Admittedly, to even make these errors, your light-years ahead of people who make the error in this sentence.

sas

sas:

DaveK:

Sheesh, pathetic! Even the trivial homonym typo ('illicit' for 'elicit') is funnier than that.

Typing 'illicit' for 'elicit' isn't a typo. It means you used the wrong word because you assumed there was only one word with that general sound. Oops. I think the use of 'elude' for 'allude' is a more common manifestation.

Admittedly, to even make these errors, your light-years ahead of people who make the error in this sentence.

sas

CAPTCHA: stinky, which is how I feel about grammar errors

/an English teacher
Your light years what?

Your light year's a head.

Just one note regarding the years: 9999 and 2008 are valid years. But 0 is *not* a valid year.

sas:

Typing 'illicit' for 'elicit' isn't a typo. It means you used the wrong word because you assumed there was only one word with that general sound. Oops. I think the use of 'elude' for 'allude' is a more common manifestation.

Admittedly, to even make these errors, your light-years ahead of people who make the error in this sentence.

The latest XKCD is specifically about grammar errors and the people who correct them.

Your light years effect more than my light years.

My light years couldn't even effect a special.

BBT:

Also a WTF:
What kind of requirements elicitation process has eliciting feedback as "optional"?

The kind that ends up featured on this site!

chishm:

The latest XKCD is specifically about grammar errors and the people who correct them.

Technically, about grammar non-errors and the people who fail to correct them.

Synonymous Awkward:

Technically, about grammar non-errors and the people who fail to correct them.

Ah, but if you fail to correct a non-error, does that mean you correctly left it as-is?

Lady Nocturne:

sas:

DaveK:

Sheesh, pathetic! Even the trivial homonym typo ('illicit' for 'elicit') is funnier than that.

Typing 'illicit' for 'elicit' isn't a typo. It means you used the wrong word because you assumed there was only one word with that general sound. Oops. I think the use of 'elude' for 'allude' is a more common manifestation.

Admittedly, to even make these errors, your light-years ahead of people who make the error in this sentence.

sas

CAPTCHA: stinky, which is how I feel about grammar errors

/an English teacher
Your light years what?

What do you think "the error in this sentence" refers to?

chishm:

Synonymous Awkward:

Technically, about grammar non-errors and the people who fail to correct them.

Ah, but if you fail to correct a non-error, does that mean you correctly left it as-is?

I was going to say "fail to incorrectly correct them", but the post was already starting to sound like some of our systems documentation as it was. :-)

DaveK:

Are we running short of material or what? That MS one is pretty desparate. Since when has it been "good enough" to post a link to a bug report/KB article/FAQ entry that merely describes a bug, rather than a graphic of the requester (or whatever) showing the actual bug itself?

I'm guessing there's something seriously wrong with that article - as pointed out above, the next paragraph in the article states
Note that the number of required characters changes from 17,145 to 18,770 with the installation of SP1.
Which is nice. You only need to add the length of short college essay to your password.

Captcha: Scooter Vroom!

Synonymous Awkward:

chishm:

Synonymous Awkward:

Technically, about grammar non-errors and the people who fail to correct them.

Ah, but if you fail to correct a non-error, does that mean you correctly left it as-is?

I was going to say "fail to incorrectly correct them", but the post was already starting to sound like some of our systems documentation as it was. :-)

On Language Log they've coined the handy term 'incorrection' for what someone does when they think they're correcting something that isn't actually wrong.

And hopefully you'd type the correct one in, rather than one of your last thirty thousand passwords.

Don't worry about that. With average typing error rates and practically zero visual feedback, the probability of correctly typing 18770 high-entropy characters is much lower than 1 in 30689. In fact, you'll probably never repeat such a password in your lifetime, even if you tried...

I hope the password change dialog supports cut+paste!

dkf:

RobertB:

Therefore, it passed my mental validity check... which is the definition of "Worse Than Failure". It "works", but really doesn't.

Thankfully, illicit user feedback is also optional. Users don't have to produce contraband comments!

When I'm involved, illicit feedback is never optional.

ParkinT:

English is a crazy language

And why is it that writers write but fingers don't fing, grocers don't groce and hammers don't ham

Umm, because fingers finger and hammers hammer?

lgrave:

Just one note regarding the years: 9999 and 2008 are valid years. But 0 is *not* a valid year.

Sure it is, it is the one that comes after 9999 when the y10k bug manifests itself.

-Notan

writing secure code with M$ ;-)

jeff:

ParkinT:

English is a crazy language

And why is it that writers write but fingers don't fing, grocers don't groce and hammers don't ham

Umm, because fingers finger and hammers hammer?

I think that was his point... if a hammer acts by hammering, then why doesn't a writer act by writering, instead of writing?

or something like that...

captcha: pointer (a pointer points, so why doesn't a-- nevermind...)

i really think you need to stop what you r doing to the bible is really wrong i really hate thhat

Real estate is a legal term (in some jurisdictions, notably in the USA, United Kingdom, Canada, and Australia) that encompasses land along with anything permanently affixed to the land, such as buildings, specifically property that is fixed in location. Real estate law is the body of regulations and legal codes which pertain to such matters under a particular jurisdiction. Real estate is often considered synonymous with real property (also sometimes called realty), in contrast with personal property (also sometimes called chattel or personalty under chattel law or personal property law).
Amy Cooper
real estate