NULL license plate not such a bright idea

Post by nvplates » Mon, Aug 12, 2019, 9:57 PM UTC

sieabahlpark wrote: post #91

kens wrote: post #43

I read years ago in comp.risks about a similar story. A guy in 1979(!) requested a personalized plate "SAILING", with second choice "BOATING". He didn't want a customized plate if he couldn't get those, so for his third choice he put down "NO PLATE". Of course, he ended up with "NO PLATE". He ended up getting 2500 parking tickets, since cars with no plate had "NO PLATE" written on the ticket. References: http://www.m…

I remember a different story where the guy had to fight every ticket in court

Post by ajross » Mon, Aug 12, 2019, 10:02 PM UTC

sloum wrote: post #285

ajross wrote: post #275

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> Droogie hasn't done anything wrong That's arguable, actually. The article states, but doesn't provide evidence, that Droogie "hoped it might confuse automatic license plate readers or the DMV's ticketing system". If this was done in an attempt to evade enforcement of existing laws, then sorry: that's a crime, folks. You aren't allowed to pen test live systems!

Why would that be a crime? Intent is irrelevant. The crime is that the DMV is running shit code that is wrongly accusing people of crimes.

Post by mijoharas » Mon, Aug 12, 2019, 10:06 PM UTC

ajross wrote: post #275

lucideer wrote: post #261

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Its a matter of principle though. Droogie hasn't done anything wrong, and is receiving fines due to errors made by the DMV. You're right that when faced with a choice between acting on principle vs acting pragmatically/for one's own benefit/convenience/need, people often don't have the luxury of (or patience for) choosing the former. But it's nice to see when someone does.

> Droogie hasn't done anything wrong That's arguable, actually. The article states, but doesn't provide evidence, that Droogie "hoped it might confuse automatic license plate readers or the DMV's ticketing system". If this was done in an attempt to evade enforcement of existing laws, then sorry: that's a crime, folks. You aren't allowed to pen test live systems!

Post by mehrdadn » Mon, Aug 12, 2019, 10:09 PM UTC

monocasa wrote: post #221

mehrdadn wrote: post #192

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> 10% more security (6.55 vs. 5.95 bits per character) That's not how this works. By your logic having a password consisting of 1,2,3,4 is only twice as secure as having just 1,2.

That's absolutely how bits of entropy work.

Post by tobyhinloopen » Mon, Aug 12, 2019, 10:17 PM UTC

pc86 wrote: post #327

gruez wrote: post #184

Earlier quoted context omitted.

>Avoid backticks in passwords. Is there even a reason to include special characters in passwords? They add 10% more security[1] but cause all sorts of issues with systems. Just use an alphanumeric password that's 10% longer, and if special characters are mandatory, use a safe character at the end like _ or -. [1] 6.55 bits per character (all printable ascii characters) rather than 5.95 (only alphanumeric)

If passwords are hashed should any character be prohibited at all?