Groups | Search | Server Info | Keyboard shortcuts | Login | Register [http] [https] [nntp] [nntps]

Groups > linux.debian.bugs.dist > #1187361 > unrolled thread

Bug#1064617: Passwords should not be changed frequently

Back to article view | Back to linux.debian.bugs.dist

Contents

  Bug#1064617: Passwords should not be changed frequently Matthew Wilcox <willy@infradead.org> - 2024-02-25 01:50 +0100
    Bug#1064617: Passwords should not be changed frequently Pascal Hambourg <pascal@plouf.fr.eu.org> - 2024-02-25 23:50 +0100
      Bug#1064617: Passwords should not be changed frequently Philip Hands <phil@hands.com> - 2024-02-29 21:10 +0100
        Bug#1064617: Passwords should not be changed frequently Holger Wansing <hwansing@mailbox.org> - 2024-02-29 23:20 +0100
          Bug#1064617: Passwords should not be changed frequently Diederik de Haas <didi.debian@cknow.org> - 2024-03-01 00:40 +0100
            Bug#1064617: Passwords should not be changed frequently Philip Hands <phil@hands.com> - 2024-03-01 07:00 +0100
              Bug#1064617: Passwords should not be changed frequently Diederik de Haas <didi.debian@cknow.org> - 2024-03-01 15:50 +0100
              Bug#1064617: Passwords should not be changed frequently Holger Wansing <hwansing@mailbox.org> - 2024-03-01 21:00 +0100
                Bug#1064617: Passwords should not be changed frequently Diederik de Haas <didi.debian@cknow.org> - 2024-03-01 22:40 +0100
                  Bug#1064617: Passwords should not be changed frequently Philip Hands <phil@hands.com> - 2024-03-02 21:10 +0100
                    Bug#1064617: Passwords should not be changed frequently Diederik de Haas <didi.debian@cknow.org> - 2024-03-02 23:00 +0100
                    Bug#1064617: Passwords should not be changed frequently Holger Wansing <hwansing@mailbox.org> - 2024-03-03 00:50 +0100
                      Bug#1064617: Passwords should not be changed frequently Philip Hands <phil@hands.com> - 2024-03-04 06:30 +0100
                        Bug#1064617: Passwords should not be changed frequently Holger Wansing <hwansing@mailbox.org> - 2024-03-04 10:50 +0100
                          Bug#1064617: Passwords should not be changed frequently Diederik de Haas <didi.debian@cknow.org> - 2024-03-04 16:10 +0100
                            Bug#1064617: Passwords should not be changed frequently Holger Wansing <hwansing@mailbox.org> - 2024-03-04 22:40 +0100
                              Bug#1064617: Passwords should not be changed frequently Diederik de Haas <didi.debian@cknow.org> - 2024-03-04 23:00 +0100
                          Bug#1064617: Passwords should not be changed frequently Holger Wansing <hwansing@mailbox.org> - 2024-03-04 22:10 +0100
    Bug#1064617: Passwords should not be changed frequently Holger Wansing <hwansing@mailbox.org> - 2024-03-05 16:20 +0100
      Bug#1064617: Passwords should not be changed frequently Philip Hands <phil@hands.com> - 2024-03-05 18:00 +0100
        Bug#1064617: Passwords should not be changed frequently Cyril Brulebois <kibi@debian.org> - 2024-03-05 19:40 +0100
          Bug#1064617: Passwords should not be changed frequently Holger Wansing <hwansing@mailbox.org> - 2024-03-05 20:40 +0100
            Bug#1064617: Passwords should not be changed frequently Justin B Rye <justin.byam.rye@gmail.com> - 2024-03-05 21:50 +0100
              Bug#1064617: Passwords should not be changed frequently Philip Hands <phil@hands.com> - 2024-03-05 22:30 +0100
                Bug#1064617: Passwords should not be changed frequently Justin B Rye <justin.byam.rye@gmail.com> - 2024-03-05 23:00 +0100
                  Bug#1064617: Passwords should not be changed frequently Philip Hands <phil@hands.com> - 2024-03-06 08:40 +0100
                    Bug#1064617: Passwords should not be changed frequently Justin B Rye <justin.byam.rye@gmail.com> - 2024-03-06 09:20 +0100
                      Bug#1064617: Passwords should not be changed frequently Philip Hands <phil@hands.com> - 2024-03-06 11:20 +0100
                        Bug#1064617: Passwords should not be changed frequently Justin B Rye <justin.byam.rye@gmail.com> - 2024-03-06 13:30 +0100
                          Bug#1064617: Passwords should not be changed frequently Diederik de Haas <didi.debian@cknow.org> - 2024-03-06 14:00 +0100
                          Bug#1064617: Passwords should not be changed frequently Philip Hands <phil@hands.com> - 2024-03-06 16:00 +0100
                            Bug#1064617: Passwords should not be changed frequently Justin B Rye <justin.byam.rye@gmail.com> - 2024-03-07 09:00 +0100
                              Bug#1064617: Passwords should not be changed frequently Holger Wansing <hwansing@mailbox.org> - 2024-03-07 20:30 +0100
                              Bug#1064617: Passwords should not be changed frequently Philip Hands <phil@hands.com> - 2024-03-08 20:10 +0100
                                Bug#1064617: Passwords should not be changed frequently Diederik de Haas <didi.debian@cknow.org> - 2024-03-08 23:20 +0100
                                Bug#1064617: Passwords should not be changed frequently Justin B Rye <justin.byam.rye@gmail.com> - 2024-03-09 14:00 +0100
                                Bug#1064617: Passwords should not be changed frequently Holger Wansing <hwansing@mailbox.org> - 2024-03-09 16:40 +0100
          Bug#1064617: Passwords should not be changed frequently Philip Hands <phil@hands.com> - 2024-03-05 20:50 +0100
            Bug#1064617: Passwords should not be changed frequently Holger Wansing <hwansing@mailbox.org> - 2024-03-06 19:50 +0100
    Bug#1064617: Passwords should not be changed frequently Diederik de Haas <didi.debian@cknow.org> - 2024-03-05 19:40 +0100

Page 1 of 2  [1] 2  Next page →

#1187361 — Bug#1064617: Passwords should not be changed frequently

Package: debian-installer

I just did an installation with the 2024-02-24
debian-testing-amd64-netinst.iso image.  I forget the exact wording
used, but when setting up a user, d-i printed advice that user passwords
should be changed frequently.  This is no longer current good advice
(since 2017):

 "Verifiers SHOULD NOT require memorized secrets to be changed arbitrarily
 (e.g., periodically).  However, verifiers SHALL force a change if there
 is evidence of compromise of the authenticator."

https://nvlpubs.nist.gov/nistpubs/SpecialPublications/NIST.SP.800-63b.pdf

I happen to like their suggestion of providing a password-strength meter,
but that would be a separate bug.  This bug is simply a request to remove
this outdated suggestion text from d-i.

[toc] | [next] | [standalone]

#1187510

On 25/02/2024 at 01:17, Matthew Wilcox wrote:
> 
> I just did an installation with the 2024-02-24
> debian-testing-amd64-netinst.iso image.  I forget the exact wording
> used, but when setting up a user, d-i printed advice that user passwords
> should be changed frequently.  This is no longer current good advice
> (since 2017):

This topic has some history, see
<https://bugs.debian.org/cgi-bin/bugreport.cgi?bug=656509>
<https://bugs.debian.org/cgi-bin/bugreport.cgi?bug=868869>
<https://bugs.debian.org/cgi-bin/bugreport.cgi?bug=998408>
<https://salsa.debian.org/installer-team/user-setup/-/merge_requests/7>

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#1188488

[Multipart message — attachments visible in raw view] — view raw

Pascal Hambourg <pascal@plouf.fr.eu.org> writes:

> On 25/02/2024 at 01:17, Matthew Wilcox wrote:
>> 
>> I just did an installation with the 2024-02-24
>> debian-testing-amd64-netinst.iso image.  I forget the exact wording
>> used, but when setting up a user, d-i printed advice that user passwords
>> should be changed frequently.  This is no longer current good advice
>> (since 2017):
>
> This topic has some history, see
> <https://bugs.debian.org/cgi-bin/bugreport.cgi?bug=656509>
> <https://bugs.debian.org/cgi-bin/bugreport.cgi?bug=868869>
> <https://bugs.debian.org/cgi-bin/bugreport.cgi?bug=998408>
> <https://salsa.debian.org/installer-team/user-setup/-/merge_requests/7>

It had not occured to me until Matthew's suggestion that we might simply
remove the obsolete advice, rather than trying to improve the wording.

In light of that, I've split the MR into 2 commits, the first of which
removes the old advice (which hopefully inflicts the smallest possible
load on our translators) and the second of which is an attempt to come
up with something better (criticism welcome, I've had multiple attempts
at this, so I imagine there's still room for improvement).

Depending upon whether we think it's worth using translators' time on
this subject, we can then select one or both commits, and finally close
these bugs.

You can see my latest attempt here:

  https://openqa.debian.net/tests/238094#step/passwords/1

in which I'm recommending setting no password for root, which then gives
the initial user 'sudo' membership[1].

The slightly awkward thing about this recommendation is that it
encourages people to put themselves in the situation that:

  https://salsa.debian.org/installer-team/user-setup/-/merge_requests/6

is trying to address, so if we make this recommendation, we should also
deal with that issue (which I think we should do anyway).

Cheers, Phil.

[1] This strikes me as decent advice for newbies, for whom this sort of
    guidance is most necessary. The problem with asking a newbie for a
    root password is that they're likely to choose a poor one. Even if
    they later realise that they should have choosen better passwords,
    they may well not at that point remember that they still have a
    useless password for root that needs updating.

    On the other hand, now that ssh defaults to not allowing password
    based logins to root, perhaps the potential presence of a poor
    password on a sudo enabled account should be of greater concern,
    since that will still be open to remote logins, so I can see that
    one could argue this either way.
-- 
Philip Hands -- https://hands.com/~phil

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#1188522

Hi,

Philip Hands <phil@hands.com> wrote (Thu, 29 Feb 2024 20:53:10 +0100):
> Depending upon whether we think it's worth using translators' time on
> this subject, we can then select one or both commits, and finally close
> these bugs.

I think it would be worth it to generate some work for translators here, yes.

> You can see my latest attempt here:
> 
>   https://openqa.debian.net/tests/238094#step/passwords/1
> 
> in which I'm recommending setting no password for root, which then gives
> the initial user 'sudo' membership[1].

What about the "Allow login as root?" question (only shown in expert mode),
which is asked directly before the above mentioned dialog?
(That's in user-setup-udeb.templates - line 25 ff.)

Maybe that needs some re-wording too?

Seems somewhat inconsistent now IMO:
if you say 'Yes' to 'Allow login as root' you get the next dialog allowing
the same choice again (or at least very similar): 
'It is possible [...] to lock the root acount ... If you leave the password
here unset, then this is what happens.'

Is that understandable for users?


Holger


-- 
Holger Wansing <hwansing@mailbox.org>
PGP-Fingerprint: 496A C6E8 1442 4B34 8508  3529 59F1 87CA 156E B076

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#1188536

[Multipart message — attachments visible in raw view] — view raw

On Thursday, 29 February 2024 23:13:55 CET Holger Wansing wrote:
> > in which I'm recommending setting no password for root, which then gives
> > the initial user 'sudo' membership[1].
> 
> What about the "Allow login as root?" question (only shown in expert mode),
> which is asked directly before the above mentioned dialog?

I very much support the suggestion from the (initial) bug report:
removing bad advice

But this is changing the subject in fundamental ways, which should be 
discussed in a separate bug report with an appropriate title.

1) Suddenly we assume that the user is incapable of coming up with a good 
password for root? Where is that based upon?
2) If they're incapable of coming up with a good password for root, then 
they're incapable of given their normal account, with sudo privileges, a 
decent password too, right?
3) Default behavior now becomes *not* creating a root account? If we divert 
from a years/decades long default, there needs to be good reasons for it IMO.

Defaults matter and I'm not happy that so much things get put into expert mode 
or (only) made available via preseed, just because we're worried it may 
confuse users (or we think they're idiots, which is way worse). 

"This 'users are idiots, and are confused by functionality' mentality of Gnome 
is a disease. If you think your users are idiots, only idiots will use it."

My 0.02

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#1188552

Hi Diederik,

You're probably right that it deserves a separate bug, but I was trying
to avoid wasting the translators time by doing this in two steps, and
forcing them to do the work twice.

I cannot say that I have read the stuff in these dialogs (except when
editing them) for at least 20 years, so tailoring the content of them
for people like me seems like a mistake. I was therefore trying to put
myself in the position of a person that's reading them for the first
time, and perhaps a person that's installing Linux for the first time.

Having helped people to install Linux for ~30 years, I'd say that it's
the norm for people to be almost incapable of coming up with a decent
password if they were not expecting the question.

As I said, I'm happy to hear better suggestions, since I've had about 15
attempts at this so far, and every time I see the text rendered in the
D-I screenshot, I end up not liking the result very much.

If you want to make a constructive contribution, how about suggesting a
wording that reflects the advice that you think would be most useful to
the people that actually read the advice?

If nothing like a consensus is available, then just removing the old
advice seems like an OK place to end up too, which is why I went to the
effort of splitting the commits.

Cheers, Phil.
-- 
Philip Hands -- https://hands.com/~phil

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#1188649

[Multipart message — attachments visible in raw view] — view raw

Hi Philip,

On Friday, 1 March 2024 06:46:27 CET Philip Hands wrote:
> Having helped people to install Linux for ~30 years, I'd say that it's
> the norm for people to be almost incapable of coming up with a decent
> password if they were not expecting the question.

I fully agree that most people use terrible passwords, due to decades of 
terrible advise about 'good' passwords:

https://milliways.social/@mcfly/111187875394339616
https://xkcd.com/936/

On an *old* screenshot I had from d-i I found this:
"A good password will contain a mixture of letters, numbers and punctuation"

Fortunately that seems to have already been fixed :)

I'll note that not every system needs strong security; some of my VMs have a 
terrible *root* password and that is/was deliberate. 

> If you want to make a constructive contribution, how about suggesting a
> wording that reflects the advice that you think would be most useful to
> the people that actually read the advice?

It makes me sad if we assume that people won't even read it :(
People not reading a 50+ page EULA, I can understand that. But a few lines of 
instruction/help when installing a fresh Operating System should not be too 
much to ask? Or am I completely out of touch with reality?

From MR 7:
> It is possible (and generally recommended) to lock the 'root' (system 
> administrative) account, thus preventing direct password-based logins to
> 'root'.

I wasn't aware that that's now the recommended way to do things.
An important reason why I responded was that I recently had to nuke a system 
with a locked root account because I couldn't get into emergency mode to fix a 
(rather simple) mistake. Due to this bug I found #802211 which seems to 
indicate it would've been possible (if setup in advance?). Had I known it.

And apparently I'm the only one who's bothered by removing the root account 
screen, so go ahead. I'll find a way around it for myself.

Cheers,
  Diederik

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#1188675

[Multipart message — attachments visible in raw view] — view raw

Hi,

Philip Hands <phil@hands.com> wrote (Fri, 01 Mar 2024 06:46:27 +0100):
> If you want to make a constructive contribution, how about suggesting a
> wording that reflects the advice that you think would be most useful to
> the people that actually read the advice?

I would like to make a proposal, leaving the default setting as is 
(aka: default to an enabled root account, no sudo), with only some wording 
changings.

Patch attached.

What do you think?


Holger


-- 
Holger Wansing <hwansing@mailbox.org>
PGP-Fingerprint: 496A C6E8 1442 4B34 8508  3529 59F1 87CA 156E B076

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#1188696

[Multipart message — attachments visible in raw view] — view raw

Hi,

On Friday, 1 March 2024 20:46:49 CET Holger Wansing wrote:
> Philip Hands <phil@hands.com> wrote (Fri, 01 Mar 2024 06:46:27 +0100):
> > If you want to make a constructive contribution, how about suggesting a
> > wording that reflects the advice that you think would be most useful to
> > the people that actually read the advice?
> 
> I would like to make a proposal, leaving the default setting as is
> (aka: default to an enabled root account, no sudo), with only some wording
> changings.
> 
> Patch attached.
> 
> What do you think?

I think it's an improvement and I have some suggestions, which hopefully makes 
it even better. I don't have a git-diff, but hopefully this works too.

I'm not a native English speaker or particularly good at this, so it's more 
the direction then the exact wording that's important. Others can undoubtedly 
improve upon it.

 _Description: Root password:
"You need to set a password for 'root', the system administrative account. The 
'root' user has full control over the whole system, so it's extra important to 
protect it with a strong password. A strong password is usually a sentence, 
consisting of words not commonly found together in natural language. And not 
easily associated with you."*

*) Not sure if there's room for it, but examples often help:
1) That's a battery staple? Correct!
2) Margaret Thatcher is 110% sexy

ad 1) xkcd 936
ad 2) An example Edward Snowden gave in an interview (with Vice?)

Why?
- We need to get rid of the *word* part; making it long (via a sentence) is 
the easiest way to make it stronger. I don't know if passphrase is 
(technically) correct or easily understood though.
- "A malicious or unqualified user ... can have disastrous results"
I think it doesn't add useful or correct info as a benign qualified 'root' user 
making an error and can also wreak havoc. (A good password doesn't prevent 
that though)
- A memorable password or passphrase can (always?) be guessed; the goal is to 
make it as hard as possible.
- "It should not be a word found in dictionaries"
I know where it comes from, but it's not helpful. And it gives the impression 
it should be a single word. A 'normal' dictionary contains a LOT of words and 
saying you can't use any of them makes it almost impossible for the user to 
make a good password/passphrase. That they can remember.
I haven't verified it, but I'm guessing the words from Diceware Word List are 
all present in the 'normal' dictionary?

"Note that you will not see the password in clear text as you type it, except 
if you explicitly choose to show it."

You *are* able to see the plain text password, just not by default.

HTH,
  Diederik

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#1188839

[Multipart message — attachments visible in raw view] — view raw

Diederik de Haas <didi.debian@cknow.org> writes:

> Hi,
>
> On Friday, 1 March 2024 20:46:49 CET Holger Wansing wrote:
>> Philip Hands <phil@hands.com> wrote (Fri, 01 Mar 2024 06:46:27 +0100):
>> > If you want to make a constructive contribution, how about suggesting a
>> > wording that reflects the advice that you think would be most useful to
>> > the people that actually read the advice?
>> 
>> I would like to make a proposal, leaving the default setting as is
>> (aka: default to an enabled root account, no sudo), with only some wording
>> changings.
>> 
>> Patch attached.
>> 
>> What do you think?
>
> I think it's an improvement and I have some suggestions, which hopefully makes 
> it even better. I don't have a git-diff, but hopefully this works too.
>
> I'm not a native English speaker or particularly good at this, so it's more 
> the direction then the exact wording that's important. Others can undoubtedly 
> improve upon it.
>
>  _Description: Root password:
> "You need to set a password for 'root', the system administrative account.

This sentence is the thing that prompted me to change things in the
first place, because it is not true. One does not _need_ to set a root
password.

I don't actually care very much whether we encourage sudo use. My
wording ended up (after many variations) quite strongly encouraging it
mostly as an antidote to the implication that comes from having a
question dedicated to setting the root password, but I'd be happy with
any wording that makes sure that people understand that both options are
totally fine.

The other thing that I was trying to ensure is that people are reassured
that they'll get to specify a password that will get them root access even if
they decide to leave the root password unset.  This is because I've seen
people become quite uncertain about what to expect at this point in the
install.

I've found that it is not easy to come up with things that include much
nuance about this, while still fitting in the space available, which is
why I decided to try a more opinionated approach.

One could soften what I wrote by replacing "generally recommended" with
something like "often appropriate" -- how does that seem to people?

One can of course tinker with this stuff indefinitely. I actually spent
a fair amount of time wondering how best to describe not setting a root
password for instance -- should one say "leave the password unset", "set
an empty password", "enter no password", or something like "just hit
<RETURN>"? (and does that last one actually apply to all the available
UIs?).

The same goes for how you say that the password is not going to get
shown (unless you ask for it to be shown), which in the GTK UI gets
characters replaced with dots, IIRC in the text UI its with asterisks,
and I'd guess it just gets completely hidden in the speech install.

Cheers, Phil.
-- 
Philip Hands -- https://hands.com/~phil

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#1188850

[Multipart message — attachments visible in raw view] — view raw

On Saturday, 2 March 2024 21:07:34 CET Philip Hands wrote:
> I don't actually care very much whether we encourage sudo use.

A person who I consider very knowledgeable deliberately went for sudo and 
disabled the root account for security reasons. It was an image provided by 
him that I ended up nuking as I didn't know if/how I could rescue that system 
because it had no root account I could use.
I guess my knowledge (and certainly habits) are dated now.

> The other thing that I was trying to ensure is that people are reassured
> that they'll get to specify a password that will get them root access even
> if they decide to leave the root password unset.  This is because I've seen
> people become quite uncertain about what to expect at this point in the
> install.

You (both) obviously got more experience in these situations.

My response was based on Holger's suggestion. While I did read through various 
things, I missed the most important one:
https://openqa.debian.net/tests/238094#step/passwords/1 

That screen and wording looks pretty good :)

> I've found that it is not easy to come up with things that include much
> nuance about this, while still fitting in the space available, which is
> why I decided to try a more opinionated approach.

My suggestion took considerable time to formulate (and was still not very 
pleased with it) as I ran into the same problem.
*IF* we want more nuance/details, the install screens aren't the place.

I can get hung up too much on certain words (like 'passwords') and that's 
generally not very helpful. What I do (still) care about is getting rid of the 
"At least a capital letter and a special character" and that is absent from 
the "passwords/1" screen :)

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#1188855

[Multipart message — attachments visible in raw view] — view raw

Hi,

Am 2. März 2024 21:07:34 MEZ schrieb Philip Hands <phil@hands.com>:
>
>This sentence is the thing that prompted me to change things in the
>first place, because it is not true. One does not _need_ to set a root
>password.

It should be understood as 
"If you want to enable login as root, you have to set a root password now."

And in expert mode it is in fact working this way:
At first, you are asked if you want to enable login as root. If you answer yes 
here, you are prompted to set a root password. 
And at that point it is indeed required to set a root password, since you 
chose to enable root login in the first question and the installer does not
allow an empty password for root.

To make it work in default install, we could change the question as
in above citation.

>I don't actually care very much whether we encourage sudo use. My
>wording ended up (after many variations) quite strongly encouraging it
>mostly as an antidote to the implication that comes from having a
>question dedicated to setting the root password, but I'd be happy with
>any wording that makes sure that people understand that both options are
>totally fine.

The sudo possibility is also mentioned:

'The root user should not have an empty password. If you leave this
empty, the root account will be disabled and the system's initial user
account will be given the power to become root using the "sudo"
command.'

I have rephrased that a bit, see below.

>The other thing that I was trying to ensure is that people are reassured
>that they'll get to specify a password that will get them root access even if
>they decide to leave the root password unset.  This is because I've seen
>people become quite uncertain about what to expect at this point in the
>install.
>
>I've found that it is not easy to come up with things that include much
>nuance about this, while still fitting in the space available, which is
>why I decided to try a more opinionated approach.
>
>One could soften what I wrote by replacing "generally recommended" with
>something like "often appropriate" -- how does that seem to people?

Your proposal too much focusses on the sudo way IMO.
We risk getting complains from people, who miss advise regarding the
enabled root login.

I have rephrased the dialog a bit, to make the sudo way more visible and
better understandable.

>One can of course tinker with this stuff indefinitely. I actually spent
>a fair amount of time wondering how best to describe not setting a root
>password for instance -- should one say "leave the password unset", "set
>an empty password", "enter no password", or something like "just hit
><RETURN>"? (and does that last one actually apply to all the available
>UIs?).
>
>The same goes for how you say that the password is not going to get
>shown (unless you ask for it to be shown), which in the GTK UI gets
>characters replaced with dots, IIRC in the text UI its with asterisks,
>and I'd guess it just gets completely hidden in the speech install.

I think that's not much of a problem. People are used to the situation,
that passwords are not shown, but replaced by asterisks or similar.
And we have the checkbox for showing it in clear text, that should be
enough.


Updated patch attached.


Holger

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#1188992

[Multipart message — attachments visible in raw view] — view raw

Holger Wansing <hwansing@mailbox.org> writes:

> Hi,
>
> Am 2. März 2024 21:07:34 MEZ schrieb Philip Hands <phil@hands.com>:
>>
>>This sentence is the thing that prompted me to change things in the
>>first place, because it is not true. One does not _need_ to set a root
>>password.
>
> It should be understood as 
> "If you want to enable login as root, you have to set a root password now."
>
> And in expert mode it is in fact working this way:
> At first, you are asked if you want to enable login as root. If you answer yes 
> here, you are prompted to set a root password. 
> And at that point it is indeed required to set a root password, since you 
> chose to enable root login in the first question and the installer does not
> allow an empty password for root.
>
> To make it work in default install, we could change the question as
> in above citation.
>
>>I don't actually care very much whether we encourage sudo use. My
>>wording ended up (after many variations) quite strongly encouraging it
>>mostly as an antidote to the implication that comes from having a
>>question dedicated to setting the root password, but I'd be happy with
>>any wording that makes sure that people understand that both options are
>>totally fine.
>
> The sudo possibility is also mentioned:
>
> 'The root user should not have an empty password. If you leave this
> empty, the root account will be disabled and the system's initial user
> account will be given the power to become root using the "sudo"
> command.'
>
> I have rephrased that a bit, see below.
>
>>The other thing that I was trying to ensure is that people are reassured
>>that they'll get to specify a password that will get them root access even if
>>they decide to leave the root password unset.  This is because I've seen
>>people become quite uncertain about what to expect at this point in the
>>install.
>>
>>I've found that it is not easy to come up with things that include much
>>nuance about this, while still fitting in the space available, which is
>>why I decided to try a more opinionated approach.
>>
>>One could soften what I wrote by replacing "generally recommended" with
>>something like "often appropriate" -- how does that seem to people?
>
> Your proposal too much focusses on the sudo way IMO.
> We risk getting complains from people, who miss advise regarding the
> enabled root login.
>
> I have rephrased the dialog a bit, to make the sudo way more visible and
> better understandable.
>
>>One can of course tinker with this stuff indefinitely. I actually spent
>>a fair amount of time wondering how best to describe not setting a root
>>password for instance -- should one say "leave the password unset", "set
>>an empty password", "enter no password", or something like "just hit
>><RETURN>"? (and does that last one actually apply to all the available
>>UIs?).
>>
>>The same goes for how you say that the password is not going to get
>>shown (unless you ask for it to be shown), which in the GTK UI gets
>>characters replaced with dots, IIRC in the text UI its with asterisks,
>>and I'd guess it just gets completely hidden in the speech install.
>
> I think that's not much of a problem. People are used to the situation,
> that passwords are not shown, but replaced by asterisks or similar.
> And we have the checkbox for showing it in clear text, that should be
> enough.
>
>
> Updated patch attached.
>
>
> Holger
>
>
>
> diff --git a/debian/user-setup-udeb.templates b/debian/user-setup-udeb.templates
> index cdb6d78..7393511 100644
> --- a/debian/user-setup-udeb.templates
> +++ b/debian/user-setup-udeb.templates
> @@ -34,21 +34,19 @@ Template: passwd/root-password
>  Type: password
>  # :sl1:
>  _Description: Root password:
> - You need to set a password for 'root', the system administrative
> - account. A malicious or unqualified user with root access can have
> + If you want to allow login as root, you need to set a password for 'root',
> + the system administrative account now.
> + A malicious or unqualified user with root access can have
>   disastrous results, so you should take care to choose a root password
> - that is not easy to guess. It should not be a word found in dictionaries,
> - or a word that could be easily associated with you.
> + that cannot be guessed. It should not be a word found in dictionaries,
> + or something that could be easily associated with you.
>   .
> - A good password will contain a mixture of letters, numbers and punctuation
> - and should be changed at regular intervals.
> + You can also leave the password for root empty here, to disable the root
> + account; the system's initial user account (which will be set up in the next
> + step) will then be given the power to become root using the "sudo" command.
>   .
> - The root user should not have an empty password. If you leave this
> - empty, the root account will be disabled and the system's initial user
> - account will be given the power to become root using the "sudo"
> - command.
> - .
> - Note that you will not be able to see the password as you type it.
> + Note that you will not be able to see the password as you type it (except if
> + you choose to show it in clear text).
>  
>  Template: passwd/root-password-again
>  Type: password
> @@ -110,8 +108,7 @@ Template: passwd/user-password
>  Type: password
>  # :sl1:
>  _Description: Choose a password for the new user:
> - A good password will contain a mixture of letters, numbers and punctuation
> - and should be changed at regular intervals.
> + Make sure to select a strong password, that cannot be guessed.
>  
>  Template: passwd/user-password-again
>  Type: password

I found that there were some phrases that I was avoiding for various
reasons, a couple of which I see you've used, so I'll say why I was avoiding
them and see if I have a persuasive argument for doing so.

"allow/deny login/access as root":

  The problem here is that not having a password for root only prevents
  one from getting direct access to root by using a password. Indirect
  access is still available via sudo, and direct access is still
  available via key bassed ssh.  I was also avoiding saying things like
  "disable the root account" for the same reason.

  This is why I ended up with the phrasing:

     direct password-based logins to 'root'.

"using the 'sudo' command":

  This I was avoiding becuase it might give the impression that one MUST
  use sudo, whereas most people will actually get their root acces via a
  GUI prompting them for their own pasword (because it's checked that
  they're in the sudo group) when doing things like unlocking their
  network or printer settings. I thought it was worth mentining the
  'sudo' group explicitly because that gives something to search for if
  they want to find out more, but telling people they need to use the
  sudo command seemed like a step too far.

Regarding the password advice, I ended up concluding that it's pretty
unlikely that anything we say at this point will have any effect on
people's behaviour, but then I'm probably just an old cynic. Also, I
failed when trying to come up with a wording which I was happy with,
which is why I ended up discarding the advice entirely.

If we want to keep the password advice in then I think what you wrote is
(mostly) OK, although I think it implies that one should be choosing a
single "password" (although, not a word in any normal sense), which
could be argued to steer people away from the perfectly decent xkcd
approach of using several dictionary words. Saying "Password or
Passphrase" at least once would probably address that.

Cheers, Phil.
-- 
Philip Hands -- https://hands.com/~phil

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#1189013

Hi,

Am 4. März 2024 06:17:31 MEZ schrieb Philip Hands <phil@hands.com>:
>I found that there were some phrases that I was avoiding for various
>reasons, a couple of which I see you've used, so I'll say why I was avoiding
>them and see if I have a persuasive argument for doing so.
>
>"allow/deny login/access as root":
>
>  The problem here is that not having a password for root only prevents
>  one from getting direct access to root by using a password. Indirect
>  access is still available via sudo, and direct access is still
>  available via key bassed ssh.  I was also avoiding saying things like
>  "disable the root account" for the same reason.
>
>  This is why I ended up with the phrasing:
>
>     direct password-based logins to 'root'.

Ok, seems fair. I would change to that then.

>
>"using the 'sudo' command":
>
>  This I was avoiding becuase it might give the impression that one MUST
>  use sudo, whereas most people will actually get their root acces via a
>  GUI prompting them for their own pasword (because it's checked that
>  they're in the sudo group) when doing things like unlocking their
>  network or printer settings. I thought it was worth mentining the
>  'sudo' group explicitly because that gives something to search for if
>  they want to find out more, but telling people they need to use the
>  sudo command seemed like a step too far.

Correct so far. Maybe a bit more technical and therefore probably
not the easiest choice for newbies, but I have no problem using that.

>Regarding the password advice, I ended up concluding that it's pretty
>unlikely that anything we say at this point will have any effect on
>people's behaviour, but then I'm probably just an old cynic. Also, I
>failed when trying to come up with a wording which I was happy with,
>which is why I ended up discarding the advice entirely.
>
>If we want to keep the password advice in then I think what you wrote is
>(mostly) OK, although I think it implies that one should be choosing a
>single "password" (although, not a word in any normal sense), which
>could be argued to steer people away from the perfectly decent xkcd
>approach of using several dictionary words. Saying "Password or
>Passphrase" at least once would probably address that.

Ok, makes it a bit longer, but it could be worth it.

I will prepare a new patch with above.


Holger


-- 
Sent from /e/ OS on Fairphone3

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#1189045

[Multipart message — attachments visible in raw view] — view raw

On Monday, 4 March 2024 10:43:59 CET Holger Wansing wrote:
> >Regarding the password advice, I ended up concluding that it's pretty
> >unlikely that anything we say at this point will have any effect on
> >people's behaviour, but then I'm probably just an old cynic. Also, I
> >failed when trying to come up with a wording which I was happy with,
> >which is why I ended up discarding the advice entirely.
> >
> >If we want to keep the password advice in then I think what you wrote is
> >(mostly) OK, although I think it implies that one should be choosing a
> >single "password" (although, not a word in any normal sense), which
> >could be argued to steer people away from the perfectly decent xkcd
> >approach of using several dictionary words. Saying "Password or
> >Passphrase" at least once would probably address that.
> 
> Ok, makes it a bit longer, but it could be worth it.

https://wiki.debian.org/Passwords doesn't exist (yet), but it's an easy to 
remember URL and we'd have all the space we need to give proper advise?

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#1189085

Hi,

Diederik de Haas <didi.debian@cknow.org> wrote (Mon, 04 Mar 2024 15:57:10 +0100):
> On Monday, 4 March 2024 10:43:59 CET Holger Wansing wrote:
> > >Regarding the password advice, I ended up concluding that it's pretty
> > >unlikely that anything we say at this point will have any effect on
> > >people's behaviour, but then I'm probably just an old cynic. Also, I
> > >failed when trying to come up with a wording which I was happy with,
> > >which is why I ended up discarding the advice entirely.
> > >
> > >If we want to keep the password advice in then I think what you wrote is
> > >(mostly) OK, although I think it implies that one should be choosing a
> > >single "password" (although, not a word in any normal sense), which
> > >could be argued to steer people away from the perfectly decent xkcd
> > >approach of using several dictionary words. Saying "Password or
> > >Passphrase" at least once would probably address that.
> > 
> > Ok, makes it a bit longer, but it could be worth it.
> 
> https://wiki.debian.org/Passwords doesn't exist (yet), but it's an easy to 
> remember URL and we'd have all the space we need to give proper advise?

Would need to check if that fits in the relevant screens (I want to avoid
having a scroll bar on that screens).


Holger

-- 
Holger Wansing <hwansing@mailbox.org>
PGP-Fingerprint: 496A C6E8 1442 4B34 8508  3529 59F1 87CA 156E B076

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#1189090

[Multipart message — attachments visible in raw view] — view raw

On Monday, 4 March 2024 22:30:57 CET Holger Wansing wrote:
> > https://wiki.debian.org/Passwords doesn't exist (yet), but it's an easy to
> > remember URL and we'd have all the space we need to give proper advise?
> 
> Would need to check if that fits in the relevant screens (I want to avoid
> having a scroll bar on that screens).

I didn't mean importing its contents, but just including a link/URL, which a 
user can type in a browser on a secondary device.
Therefor it needs to be short/memorable.

I later realized that putting it in the wiki may be useful, but also dangerous 
as anyone can edit a wiki (page). So another place where only authorized 
changes can be made is probably better.

Cheers,
  Diederik

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#1189078

[Multipart message — attachments visible in raw view] — view raw

Hi,

Holger Wansing <hwansing@mailbox.org> wrote (Mon, 04 Mar 2024 10:43:59 +0100):
> Hi,
> 
> Am 4. März 2024 06:17:31 MEZ schrieb Philip Hands <phil@hands.com>:
> >I found that there were some phrases that I was avoiding for various
> >reasons, a couple of which I see you've used, so I'll say why I was avoiding
> >them and see if I have a persuasive argument for doing so.
> >
> >"allow/deny login/access as root":
> >
> >  The problem here is that not having a password for root only prevents
> >  one from getting direct access to root by using a password. Indirect
> >  access is still available via sudo, and direct access is still
> >  available via key bassed ssh.  I was also avoiding saying things like
> >  "disable the root account" for the same reason.
> >
> >  This is why I ended up with the phrasing:
> >
> >     direct password-based logins to 'root'.
> 
> Ok, seems fair. I would change to that then.
> 
> >
> >"using the 'sudo' command":
> >
> >  This I was avoiding becuase it might give the impression that one MUST
> >  use sudo, whereas most people will actually get their root acces via a
> >  GUI prompting them for their own pasword (because it's checked that
> >  they're in the sudo group) when doing things like unlocking their
> >  network or printer settings. I thought it was worth mentining the
> >  'sudo' group explicitly because that gives something to search for if
> >  they want to find out more, but telling people they need to use the
> >  sudo command seemed like a step too far.
> 
> Correct so far. Maybe a bit more technical and therefore probably
> not the easiest choice for newbies, but I have no problem using that.
> 
> >Regarding the password advice, I ended up concluding that it's pretty
> >unlikely that anything we say at this point will have any effect on
> >people's behaviour, but then I'm probably just an old cynic. Also, I
> >failed when trying to come up with a wording which I was happy with,
> >which is why I ended up discarding the advice entirely.
> >
> >If we want to keep the password advice in then I think what you wrote is
> >(mostly) OK, although I think it implies that one should be choosing a
> >single "password" (although, not a word in any normal sense), which
> >could be argued to steer people away from the perfectly decent xkcd
> >approach of using several dictionary words. Saying "Password or
> >Passphrase" at least once would probably address that.
> 
> Ok, makes it a bit longer, but it could be worth it.
> 
> I will prepare a new patch with above.

Updated patch attached.

Holger


-- 
Holger Wansing <hwansing@mailbox.org>
PGP-Fingerprint: 496A C6E8 1442 4B34 8508  3529 59F1 87CA 156E B076

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#1189178

Hi,

Am 5. März 2024 15:01:21 MEZ schrieb Philip Hands <phil@hands.com>:
>Here are my latest attempts:

"Be aware that that a ..."
doubled "that"

"... (unless you select to show it)"
missing fullstop.

Otherwise: looks good to me.


Holger



-- 
Sent from /e/ OS on Fairphone3

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#1189182

[Multipart message — attachments visible in raw view] — view raw

Holger Wansing <hwansing@mailbox.org> writes:

> Hi,
>
> Am 5. März 2024 15:01:21 MEZ schrieb Philip Hands <phil@hands.com>:
>>Here are my latest attempts:
>
> "Be aware that that a ..."
> doubled "that"
>
> "... (unless you select to show it)"
> missing fullstop.

Well spotted - Thanks :-)

> Otherwise: looks good to me.

Cool, in that case I'll fix those two things and then use the result for
the MR[1], and if the openQA test runs look OK, will merge that.

Cheers, Phil.

[1] https://salsa.debian.org/installer-team/user-setup/-/merge_requests/7
-- 
Philip Hands -- https://hands.com/~phil

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

Page 1 of 2  [1] 2  Next page →

Back to top | Article view | linux.debian.bugs.dist

csiph-web