Steven Shiau wrote:
Marco Amadori wrote:
On Wednesday 03 June 2009, 16:19:14, Julien Cristau wrote:
On Wed, Jun 3, 2009 at 08:53:21 +0200, Marco Amadori wrote:
Since what it's proposed expose the password in crypted way, it seems
a better approach of what we got since today.
Marco Amadori wrote:
On Wednesday 03 June 2009, 16:19:14, Julien Cristau wrote:
On Wed, Jun 3, 2009 at 08:53:21 +0200, Marco Amadori wrote:
Since what it's proposed expose the password in crypted way, it seems
a better approach of what we got since today.
I think it's worse,
On Thu, Jun 4, 2009 at 09:02:19 +0200, Marco Amadori wrote:
> On Wednesday 03 June 2009, 16:19:14, Julien Cristau wrote:
>
> > On Wed, Jun 3, 2009 at 08:53:21 +0200, Marco Amadori wrote:
> > > Since what it's proposed expose the password in crypted way, it seems
> > > a better approach of what
On Wednesday 03 June 2009, 16:19:14, Julien Cristau wrote:
> On Wed, Jun 3, 2009 at 08:53:21 +0200, Marco Amadori wrote:
> > Since what it's proposed expose the password in crypted way, it seems
> > a better approach of what we got since today.
>
> I think it's worse, because it gives a false sen
On Wed, Jun 3, 2009 at 08:53:21 +0200, Marco Amadori wrote:
> Since what it's proposed expose the password in crypted way, it seems
> a better approach of what we got since today.
>
I think it's worse, because it gives a false sense of security.
Cheers,
Julien
--
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to deb
On Tuesday 02 June 2009, 16:23:18, Daniel Baumann wrote:
> > I have sent this before, but the patch file I sent was not good, so I
> > think it's why not being accepted.
> In general, I'm not a fan of adding such a feature. Exposing passwords
> and also their hashes to visible to any user (which
Daniel Baumann wrote:
> Steven Shiau wrote:
>
>> Hi,
>>
>
> Hi,
>
>
Hi Daniel,
>> I have sent this before, but the patch file I sent was not good, so I
>> think it's why not being accepted.
>>
>
> i hoped someone else would comment before I do, however.. here are my
> thoughts.
>
>
Steven Shiau wrote:
> Hi,
Hi,
> I have sent this before, but the patch file I sent was not good, so I
> think it's why not being accepted.
i hoped someone else would comment before I do, however.. here are my
thoughts.
In general, I'm not a fan of adding such a feature. Exposing passwords
and a
Hi,
I have sent this before, but the patch file I sent was not good, so I
think it's why not being accepted. Therefore I patch that based on
live-initramfs 1.157.2 and send it again. Hope you do not mind.
Attached files are the patches to make live-initramfs to allow assigning
user password from bo
