Skip to content
New issue

Have a question about this project? Sign up for a free GitHub account to open an issue and contact its maintainers and the community.

By clicking “Sign up for GitHub”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy statement. We’ll occasionally send you account related emails.

Already on GitHub? Sign in to your account

Password validation reject options #48

Closed
fantawttw opened this issue Oct 31, 2018 · 1 comment
Closed

Password validation reject options #48

fantawttw opened this issue Oct 31, 2018 · 1 comment
Assignees

Comments

@fantawttw
Copy link

Relates to #42
When entering a password the front end currently rejects any password that doesn't match the relevant criteria.

Change the server side to let the client side know, via the json, how to handle such situations.
so for example /info (Not sure if this may be the best place) responds with
{"maxSyncSize":1048576,"message":"server owner message","status":1,"version":"1.1.4","passwordfail":x}
where passwordfail's x is say 1 reject, or 0 warn.

The client can then do validation as currently however it can then either warn the user that the password doesn't meet criteria or reject it.

@nero120 nero120 added this to the v1.4.1 milestone Mar 1, 2019
nero120 added a commit that referenced this issue Mar 2, 2019
Password field validation simplified and now displays messages.
@nero120 nero120 self-assigned this Mar 14, 2019
@nero120
Copy link
Member

nero120 commented Mar 14, 2019

In the upcoming v1.5.0 release, the password field validation has been updated to resolve the underlying issue. The minimum requirement has been reduced to a single character so xbs does not enforce any particular password requirement, which gives the user control to use whichever password they want. However, the password strength meter is more accurate and it also displays warnings and suggestions to aid the user in choosing a more effective password.

I believe this solution is resolves the issue without requiring more complex interaction between app and api, so I'm going to close this. A beta will be released shortly should you wish to test this before final release.

@nero120 nero120 closed this as completed Mar 14, 2019
Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Projects
None yet
Development

No branches or pull requests

2 participants