(no subject)

Date: 2011-03-16 05:29 pm (UTC)
ext_8707: Taken in front of Carnegie Hall (simian)
From: [identity profile] ronebofh.livejournal.com
The DERP is strong with this one. Does that mean that hundreds of users got lumped into the 'password' and 'qwerty' accounts?

(no subject)

Date: 2011-03-16 05:42 pm (UTC)
From: [identity profile] le-trombone.livejournal.com
This is just... wow.

I really do wonder what caused this "solution". Someone must have really screwed up the database design would be my first guess and would account for the plaintext password storage.

Assuming that this isn't a hacked page, of course.

(no subject)

Date: 2011-03-16 06:00 pm (UTC)
From: [identity profile] ice-hesitant.livejournal.com
Hmm, if someone had made the plain-text password the primary key of the users table, I could see this being a (very bad) "fix".

Making both (username, password) the primary key seems a likelier mistake, but then why would this be the fix?

It defies understanding.

(no subject)

Date: 2011-03-16 06:18 pm (UTC)
From: [identity profile] chrisrw109.livejournal.com
I can't really think or any error of either design or data manipulation that results in needing this solution... and isn't almost immediately fixable by a competent database admin.

(no subject)

Date: 2011-03-16 07:20 pm (UTC)
From: [identity profile] le-trombone.livejournal.com
I suppose storing the username in the password field and vice-versa could be one explanation. But we've already ruled out "competent database admin" (or anyone conversant in SQL) just from the solution they chose.

(no subject)

Date: 2011-03-16 09:13 pm (UTC)
From: [identity profile] chrisrw109.livejournal.com
Right, but even if someone was 18 tequilas to the wind when they coded whatever did that little juxtaposition.. I can't imagine why the wouldn't... fix it.

On the other hand, the only person they have listed on their site as doing IT work does not from description come across as incredibly well-versed in this here technology stuff.

(no subject)

Date: 2011-03-16 05:38 pm (UTC)
From: [identity profile] shoofus.livejournal.com
maybe 4chan hacked the page

(no subject)

Date: 2011-03-16 06:01 pm (UTC)

(no subject)

Date: 2011-03-16 09:09 pm (UTC)
From: [identity profile] sophia8.livejournal.com
Here in the UK, the jobless already the choice of going on four weeks work experience - this will just make it mandatory.
My son did this a couple of years ago - h, but he ree was sent to work pretty much full-time with a small local firm that did furniture repairs. He only got £10 a week on top of his benefit, which barely covered his bus fares, but he really enjoyed the work. However, when he asked about being taken on full-time he was bluntly told that the firm couldn't afford to pay any more workers and that they relied on having unpaid 'workies' filling in for three or four months of the year! However - they thought that he was a really good worker, so on the odd occasions when they were short of people, would he be able to come in and work for cash?
So we're going to get a lot more of that. Sheesh......

(no subject)

Date: 2011-03-16 09:11 pm (UTC)
From: [identity profile] sophia8.livejournal.com
S***T Posted in the wrong thread, of course. Sorry about that.

Profile

theweaselking: (Default)theweaselking
Page generated Mar. 1st, 2026 09:53 am