<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?><rss version="2.0"
	xmlns:content="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/content/"
	xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/"
	xmlns:atom="http://www.w3.org/2005/Atom"
	xmlns:sy="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/syndication/"
		>
<channel>
	<title>Comments on: Standardized Password Policy?</title>
	<atom:link href="http://blog.passpack.com/2007/02/standardized-password-policy/feed/" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml" />
	<link>http://blog.passpack.com/2007/02/standardized-password-policy/</link>
	<description>Passpack keeps your logins safe, organized and available 24/7. You can share passwords with your team in 100% privacy.</description>
	<lastBuildDate>Fri, 10 May 2013 18:12:33 +0000</lastBuildDate>
	<sy:updatePeriod>hourly</sy:updatePeriod>
	<sy:updateFrequency>1</sy:updateFrequency>
	<generator>http://wordpress.org/?v=3.4</generator>
	<item>
		<title>By: Tara</title>
		<link>http://blog.passpack.com/2007/02/standardized-password-policy/comment-page-1/#comment-110</link>
		<dc:creator>Tara</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Mon, 26 Feb 2007 11:32:10 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://blog.passpack.com/2007/02/26/standardized-password-policy/#comment-110</guid>
		<description>@maverickroark

Well, I was thinking more along the lines of a set minimum of rules for a strong password policy. For example, anyone adhering to the hypothetical standard must require at least, say, 8 characters, accept spaces (pass phrases), support non-alphanumerical characters and agree to never send email conformations with passwords written in plain text.

But you&#039;re correct in that, if the rules are too strict, then they would form an easy basis for crackers to use to narrow their algorithms.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>@maverickroark</p>
<p>Well, I was thinking more along the lines of a set minimum of rules for a strong password policy. For example, anyone adhering to the hypothetical standard must require at least, say, 8 characters, accept spaces (pass phrases), support non-alphanumerical characters and agree to never send email conformations with passwords written in plain text.</p>
<p>But you&#8217;re correct in that, if the rules are too strict, then they would form an easy basis for crackers to use to narrow their algorithms.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: maverickroark</title>
		<link>http://blog.passpack.com/2007/02/standardized-password-policy/comment-page-1/#comment-109</link>
		<dc:creator>maverickroark</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Mon, 26 Feb 2007 10:56:22 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://blog.passpack.com/2007/02/26/standardized-password-policy/#comment-109</guid>
		<description>Will that really help ?

It would be very easy to crack in once you have a *standard* set for the SECRET CODE.
May be with bio passwords in some years..

that could be possible and feasible i guess..</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Will that really help ?</p>
<p>It would be very easy to crack in once you have a *standard* set for the SECRET CODE.<br />
May be with bio passwords in some years..</p>
<p>that could be possible and feasible i guess..</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
</channel>
</rss>
