I just want to summarize the password handling changes before and
after this patch.

before:
- create_user() with empty password or None -> password set to '!'
unusable
- set_password() accepts everything
- has_usable_password() returning False for password equal to '!'

after:
- create_user() with password None -> password set to '!' unusable
- set_password() with None -> password set to '!' unusable
- has_usable_password() returning False for password equal to '!' or
None

Laurent

On Oct 8, 4:47 pm, Laurent Luce <[email protected]> wrote:
> Thanks for your feedback. I attached a new patch with the following
> changes:
>
> * allow empty string in set_password()
> * has_usable_password() returns false if password is '!' or None
> * add unit test set_password(None)
> * add verbosity option to createsuperuser command + unit test
> * output msg to stdout in createsuperuser command + update unit tests
>
> Let me know if the patch still needs improvement.
>
> Laurent Luce
>
> On Oct 7, 11:17 pm, Russell Keith-Magee <[email protected]>
> wrote:
>
> > On Fri, Oct 8, 2010 at 11:28 AM, Laurent Luce <[email protected]> 
> > wrote:
> > > I noticed that create_user() is currently setting password to unusable
> > > if it is None or empty. However, set_password() is accepting an empty
> > > password. I decided to follow the first rule in the patch I submitted
> > > but I am kind of confused now. Can someone indicate what we should
> > > accept as a password?
>
> > An empty string isn't a *good* password, but then neither is a single
> > character or a dictionary word, and we don't reject those. Policy
> > decisions like this aren't the domain of a web framework.
>
> > I'm sure there are also people using an empty password as the "I don't
> > actually want security" password. Plus, there's a history in the free
> > software community of using empty passwords as a protest [1] :-)
>
> > We can use None to mark an unusable password. Absent of a good
> > technical reason, I don't see why we should reject empty string.
>
> > As for the remainder of the patch on #14354 -- on the whole, it looks
> > good. I've put some review comments on the ticket.
>
> > [1]http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Richard_Stallman#Early_years
>
> > Yours,
> > Russ Magee %-)

-- 
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups 
"Django developers" group.
To post to this group, send email to [email protected].
To unsubscribe from this group, send email to 
[email protected].
For more options, visit this group at 
http://groups.google.com/group/django-developers?hl=en.

Reply via email to