|
Grex > Coop > #299: Discussion of newuser. | |
|
| Author |
Message |
| 25 new of 85 responses total. |
cross
|
|
response 34 of 85:
|
Dec 10 03:06 UTC 2010 |
resp:32 Why?
resp:33 Resh requires the new user to change their password the first
time they login. Actually, it requires them to change whenever there's
a certain file in their home directory.
|
kentn
|
|
response 35 of 85:
|
Dec 10 04:35 UTC 2010 |
Okay, then, sounds like we're in good shape.
|
tsty
|
|
response 36 of 85:
|
Dec 10 06:29 UTC 2010 |
first of all .... about emailing passwdds... whe a newuser cone here she/he/it
creates a passwd.
wtf is wrong with that? notiohing.
second, the balidation is a time dalya, eveninfit is 30 secs.
third. hte eamil to the newuser may ot be read (or it might og iotn some spam
foledre) and be unknown for monthsl. (rt stuff is expeirience as is ... my
emaoil)..
i ahve validated .. well tried to valisdate ... reaped loginds .. which
prompted me ... a wheil aago ... to ask aobut hte reapo preocedure. wheat
i had to send was "well create your loginid AGAIN .. and i wiell validate"
fourth .. a passwd distting around for a whiel is STUPID (imnsho) wheich is
also different from the newuser's orogianl choice .. w t f ?
there is more but the above is enough, i think.
|
cross
|
|
response 37 of 85:
|
Dec 10 12:38 UTC 2010 |
I'm going to address your post point by point. I'm also going to take
the time to fix your spelling errors.
> first of all .... about emailing passwords... when a newuser comes here
> she/he/it creates a passwd.
That's not true anymore; the user isn't even prompted for a password.
Further, there's nothing that says that they *have* to give a password
to newuser.
> wtf is wrong with that? nothing.
Actually, it became a vector for abuse. I have caught specific people
making *thousands* of accounts with scripts. This way, at least we can
track that back to an email address.
Second, by generating the passord and emailing it to the user, at least we
have some sort of useful contact information: if the user logged in at all,
we know we've got an email address for them.
Lots of sites do this: ask for an email address and email an auto-generated
password to the user. It works just fine all over the Internet.
> second, the validation is a time delay, even if it is 30 secs.
What validation are you referring to? The automated validation of the
email address that newuser does? I'd say that in the worst case that
might take half a second.
Or are you talking about how long it takes for the user to get the email
so they can login for the first time? It takes a few seconds. The upsides
are worth it.
> third. the eamil to the newuser may not be read (or it might go into
> some spam folder) and be unknown for months. (rt stuff is experience as
> is ... my email).
It strikes me that if a user is interested in getting an account on Grex,
they won't mind getting an email with their password. Evidence of this is
all over the net; it's more common than not for users to get passwords
emailed to them than otherwise. If they wait for months, well, that's on
them and they weren't likely to be very interested anyway.
What's the difference between a user logging in once automatically at the
end of creating their account and never logging again, and never logging in
because they didn't bother to read the email that we told them they were
going to get?
> i have validated .. well tried to validate ... reaped logins .. which
> prompted me ... a while ago ... to ask about the reap procedure. what
> i had to send was "well create your login id AGAIN .. and i will validate"
I don't know what this has to do with newuser emailing passwords, except
perhaps an extension of the above paragraph about the user not reading his
or her email for months. Newuser is pretty explicit about telling the
user, multiple times, that it's going to send them email. If they choose
to ignore that email, then they're just as likely to login to resh, see
they can't run BNC or upload udp.pl and disappear after one login.
The policies and criteria by which we decide to reap accounts have not
changed for years. If it takes the porters months to do validation, then
that's a real problem.
> fourth .. a password sitting around for a while is STUPID (imnsho)
> which is also different from the new user's original choice .. w t f ?
What do you mean, "is also different from the new user's original choice"?
Do you mean a password that they enter, or a password that they have in
mind when they create an account on Grex? If the former, they don't enter
a password. If the latter, I claim this is actually *easier* on them
since they don't have to sit there and think of one.
To be clear, here's the basic process for getting an account on Grex:
1. Login as newuser and enter your basic information:
a. "Real" name.
b. Email address.
c. desired login name.
d. Currently, a few other questions: address, phone number, interests, etc.
* Note that password is not on this list. *
2. Newuser generates and emails you your password.
3. User gets the password, logs in and is in resh. Resh sees they've
got a special file in their home directory (I believe I named it,
".needspwchange", but I can't remember) and prompts them to change
their password.
That's it. Suppose we go on through the validation process.
4. User goes through the validation process:
a. send email to porters@grex.org with the request,
b. get an email back saying, "How'd you hear about Grex?"
c. user gives some response (really, any response will do),
d. a porter runs "validate user" on Grex, thus changing their
primary group to "people" and changing their shell to
/usr/local/bin/newly-validated (this will move to /cyberspace/bin
soon, though; the path is unimportant).
5. User logs in again (note that they changed their password the first
time they logged into resh; it doesn't change at all during the validation
process). Newly-validated chgrp's their files to the "people" group
and invokes /usr/local/bin/pickashell (again, this needs to move to
/cyberspace/bin, but the path doesn't matter); the user picks what shell
they want to use and away they go.
Now the user has real access to Grex. Supposing that they wanted the
full, unrestricted access, then go through the existing procedures, which
haven't really changed since Grex was created, to get verified: basically,
this means that they send a copy of an ID or a personal check or use
paypal, at which point someone runs "verify user" on them, which changes
their primary group to "verified" (and that's basically it; it also adds
them to "people" as a secondary group).
What I'd like to do, and what board talked about somewhere on the order
of three or four years ago, is add an automated verification system.
Basically, the user types "verify" or something on Grex, gets a URL that
they click on, they pay a couple of bucks or something through PayPal,
PayPal contacts us, we verify the payment and automagically verify them.
> there is more but the above is enough, i think.
No, I'm afraid it is not.
You are making a lot of flimsy assumptions (that the user won't
read their email, or that it will get marked as spam) and predicating
your argument on things that haven't been true for years (that the
user comes to Grex with some idea of what they want their password
to be, probably also that this is some sort of huge security risk).
It isn't 1991 anymore.
I think that what newuser is doing now is actually much better than
the old system:
a. It avoids abuse.
b. It gives us much higher quality contact information (we actually
have an email address that we know works in case the user forgets
his or her password).
c. It makes contacting the user simpler: we can look at newuser's
contact logs to get a user's email address if we want to send them
a message, instead of digging through their personal files (which
TS does regularly in order to find email addresses for validation
purposes).
d. It gives an air of professionalism to Grex that, I claim, will
increase users, not drive them away.
e. It follows well-established and widely used precedent. Indeed,
even on Grex, when we reset someone's password, we just send
them an email.
Does anyone else feel that emailing the password to the new user is
bad?
|
veek
|
|
response 38 of 85:
|
Dec 10 12:53 UTC 2010 |
well.. i'm not clear on one point..
1. we ask for his email and mail him his password, AND put him in resh?
How does he move from resh to bash??
2. we can try to avoid the spam problem by making the content in the
email a little dynamic.. Dear so and so, blah blah and in the Subject:
Grex registration information for account blah.
|
cross
|
|
response 39 of 85:
|
Dec 10 15:09 UTC 2010 |
resp:38 See steps 4 and 5 in resp:37. I really doubt the spam problem
is much of a concern, to be honest.
|
veek
|
|
response 40 of 85:
|
Dec 10 17:18 UTC 2010 |
rofl, so we keep the existing 'validation/validate' process with all
it's bureaucracy and we remove a few questions from newuser but we then
create a "new email process" <g>
(which will suck up more time! with the user having to start a browser
and login to yahoo vs taking a few additional seconds answering
questions in a SSH/telnet session he already has open)
----
I was thinking along the lines of a no "validation/resh process". Just
newuser-with-emailID-request, and password mailed to user and direct
access to bash once he recieves his password :) oh well..
|
nharmon
|
|
response 41 of 85:
|
Dec 10 17:21 UTC 2010 |
Sometimes big reforms require small changes be implemented first, veek.
|
cross
|
|
response 42 of 85:
|
Dec 10 17:31 UTC 2010 |
resp:40 I'm sorry, veek, but you appear to have a very, very
small-system mindset. History has shown that we can't just give
shell access to Grex. It sucks, but there it is. Are you going
to clean up after the Chad's of the world? No. Odds are good that
I'm going to be the one who cleans up the messes. In that context,
I am *so* unconcerned about someone having to take a few extra
*seconds* to check their email to get a password.
If we had a web pages that didn't look like they dated from 1994,
maybe we'd have more users for this to be an issue. But we don't,
and it's not. Let's work on things that are important, like getting
the web pages up to date, and then we can start worrying about this
stuff.
|
tsty
|
|
response 43 of 85:
|
Dec 11 07:16 UTC 2010 |
i;m glad cross is redoing newuser ... miy comment was historical.
the futeur wiell be differnet... and if newuewr creates NO passwed for the
new logins ... doenslt that open the flooldgarttes? charlie woueild object?
|
cross
|
|
response 44 of 85:
|
Dec 11 22:05 UTC 2010 |
resp:43 I don't understand. Newuser *does* create a password for the
user. Who's charlie?
|
jgelinas
|
|
response 45 of 85:
|
Dec 12 13:24 UTC 2010 |
I think you are moving in the right direction, cross. I only wish I
could be more useful in the endeavour.
|
kentn
|
|
response 46 of 85:
|
Dec 12 14:51 UTC 2010 |
It's helpful to show support, Joe. Thanks!
|
tsty
|
|
response 47 of 85:
|
Dec 13 17:04 UTC 2010 |
re 45 ... what gelinas said.
re 43 ... ummm, newuser process prompts new-loginid to create a passwd.
then why email that pasaswd to new-logoind's alt email addrs? or does
the newuwer process wipe out new-logoind's self-created passwd, assign a new
passwd and then email that onwe ?
as of now, i can see every bad reason to email passwds and no good ones.
charlie == charlie root ... from whom we (both??) eget daily emails. eh?
|
cross
|
|
response 48 of 85:
|
Dec 13 17:09 UTC 2010 |
resp:43 Are you talking about the captcha? That's not the user's password.
|
tsty
|
|
response 49 of 85:
|
Dec 14 02:58 UTC 2010 |
putty now has a capthca ???? i;ll have to look at teh web version again.
|
remmers
|
|
response 50 of 85:
|
Dec 14 17:08 UTC 2010 |
I like the email and captcha features in pnewuser. They're definitely
in line with common practice nowadays.
Hm, a while back I think I said I was going to post suggestions on what
newuser should say in its dialog with the user. Well, I'm on vacation
now so that's been pushed back a bit, but I'll try to get on it once I'm
home.
Speaking of dialog, one of the features of the Marcus Watts newuser was
that messages newuser put out were stored in plain text files editable
by non-programmers and read by the program at runtime. That's a nice
configurability feature. I realize that pnewuser is written in Perl, so
that's less of an issue, but I think it would be desirable to be able to
configure pnewuser's messages without touching the source code.
|
kentn
|
|
response 51 of 85:
|
Dec 14 19:00 UTC 2010 |
I went through the current command line newuser the other day, and saw
the captcha feature, too (it looks like figlet lettering). The email
feature worked nicely. It gave me the temporary password and told how
to log in via ssh, which is a good thing. When I used the password to
log in, it immediately had me change it so the user gets to use their
desired password (also a good thing). What I had trouble finding,
though I may have missed it in all the text that flowed by, was how
to get validated. That probably should be part of the resh allowed
commands list so that users will find it right away, and part of the
instructions when you log in if you are a resh user. Again, I may have
missed it, but it wasn't immediately obvious to me.
|
veek
|
|
response 52 of 85:
|
Dec 14 19:09 UTC 2010 |
is the src available for viewing? we could modify it to make sure users
understand the risks.. seen that in eclipse.cs.pdx.edu:7680, it's a
MUD. They ask the users a lot of questions that they have to get right,
before they are allowed into the main area. eg: Dear user, is it safe
for you to use the same password to signin to Grex, that you would use
at your bank web-site? and he would have to answer no.. stuff like that
given the privacy issues we now face.. it would give us a bit of
leeway.
|
nharmon
|
|
response 53 of 85:
|
Dec 14 19:18 UTC 2010 |
I too tested the command line new user recently and liked it a lot.
|
veek
|
|
response 54 of 85:
|
Dec 14 19:30 UTC 2010 |
resp:52 nm found it
|
cross
|
|
response 55 of 85:
|
Dec 15 00:48 UTC 2010 |
I am typing on my phone, so excuse the brevity. All the text is still in text
files. Source is in subvversion. It probably needs a soak.
|
tsty
|
|
response 56 of 85:
|
Dec 15 01:12 UTC 2010 |
i am -elated- taht newuser text&html have had the cross-soak applied.
that it took this much rancor to get there .. well, someitmes it does.
tnx cross & testers.
|
cross
|
|
response 57 of 85:
|
Dec 15 16:39 UTC 2010 |
Web newuser is still broke.
|
kentn
|
|
response 58 of 85:
|
Dec 15 16:44 UTC 2010 |
But on our collective list to get fixed Real Soon Now.
|