Prismlauncher! I remember browsing through the changelog and spotting this, made me chuckle internally.
I've done this before. it's funny when the users are all, "why??!" and to respond with, "because you asked for it!"
Jokes aside, I have been blocked many times by overzealous email validation. Yes, my email has a plus sign in it. This is allowed under RFC5322, so deal with it. It is better to have no validation at all than incorrect validation.
That was my best customer support interaction ever. Company did not let me register with a "new" TLD email address, as "this is not a valid email address". I wrote them from that email address. They respondend to that email address with "this is not a valid address". I wrote back "how are we writing, then?" and never heard back 😂
A plus sign? That's nothing, LOL
Quote:
If you disagree, or have any other comments, feel free to email me at
'*+-/=?^_`{|}~#$@[IPv6:2602:f977:800:0:e276:63ff:fe72:3900]-- if your mail client lets you, that is.
Because of one smartass customer who insisted on doing exact RFC 822 validation, I implemented exactly that. And yes,
zKcknV|NGv.lI66vR#@X`QcRK4K.R`?NpA.Gc2Kqzue9.%&nb1kGWp/./#Och$RQv
is one of the test cases for a valid addr-spec. See (or generate) some others at https://github.com/mormegil-cz/rfcemailvalidator
The best email validation is just sending an email to whatever provided by the user. If user receives an email and validates it, than its validated.
Email validation for a form should at most look for
Sending an email can take a few minutes. Form validation is instant.
Which would still not be perfect because "foo@bar", "foo@[123.123.123.123]" and "💩 @[IPv6 :::1]" are all technically valid email addresses.
It looks like the only validation that doesn't block something valid pretty much would start and end at "It has at least one @ symbol, and something on both sides".
So I can't be directly bezos@aws?
Email address spec is convoluted and this is indeed the best way. Noobs and ninja do it this way, normies try to validate before sending email
The worst sites are the ones that let you sign up with an unusual address but not log in. The worst I‘ve seen was some ticket system that rejected dfyx+theirdomain@mydomain after I clicked the link in their confirmation email.
There's an aspect of my surname which is somewhat unusual (at least in my country). As a result I occasionally get form validation errors when entering it. Sometimes those errors are extremely inscrutable. Sometimes a form validates but something elsewhere makes unvalidated assumptions about names which then breaks in completely unpredictable names...
Does it fall into one of the falsehoods programmers believe about names? https://www.kalzumeus.com/2010/06/17/falsehoods-programmers-believe-about-names/
Even worse is when they strip the plus sign out after the fact and then you can't log in anymore because you didn't realize that's what has happened.
This is criminal. You already send me a validation email, just check for an @ and leave me be
Yees this has happened to me before but with passwords. They have some length limit that they clamp to so you can't login after registering and I have to do a password reset right after signing up. Happened multiple times to me.
I had a website not let me enter a proton.me email address, when I changed it to my custom.fyi address, it worked fine. They wanted a three letter TLD.
No, I think they just blocked Proton email addresses. I've seen multiple services doing that.
Not sure if you also do aliases as well but I’ve seen an increase in websites flagging providers like addy.io as well. Extremely annoying that so many websites think they are so important that they refuse an alias.
I had a site refuse my email address for my .net domain. Like wtf, if it’s not .com it’s not a real email address? Idk what that was about.
Same although for a totally different reason. There are some services that really don't like gtlds and they will say your address is invalid if it doesn't end in .com, .net, or .org...all my serious domains are gtld...so some services have emails on meme domains because the only domains I have with traditional tlds are memes
The issue this is referring to is because the user cannot paste into a text field. And the user was not rude about it either.
So instead of fixing the actual problem, the developer went nuclear and removed the validation. A dick move in my opinion given the developer’s attitude.
~It’s more sad than funny. 🤷♂️~
IMO as a developer this is a sane change. There's no telling when the format of the first-party api key will change. They may switch from reference tokens to JWT tokens tomorrow. The validation should be using the token and seeing if it works.
I don't know what that repo does. But, chances are the dude was just fucking tired of dealing with curseforge. Total garbage scum software.
I hate when websites have some weird rules for passwords, and show the rule when you are creating the password, but not when entering it. How am I supposed to remember the password must begin and end with a special character?
I can't recommend password managers enough, because you will never have this issue again.
Password creation will still be annoying for sites with special rules. You just don't have to remember them once you generated them.
I've literally never had an issue with password generation. Usually I generate 32 character passwords with all types of characters passwords on average expect. If a page has different rules, I just check the corresponding boxes in my password manager, and I get one that works for that site.
Peguots(car brand) app requires between 8 and 16 characters, no repeating characters, and that it contain 4 of the following: uppercase letter, lowercase letter, number, a special character in this list @$!%*?&_- ;
You'd think that'd be fine, but no. It took me several tries to generate a password that complied, even after limiting to only valid characters and a length of 16. I got the feeling there's an extra rule not shown,maybe lost in translation. In Norwegian it literally says "no repeat or successive characters" making it sound like I can only use a letter once, but thankfully not.
Pure torture. And the app is so shit I get logged out often, and auto fill with my password manager does not work in that app. Pressing login also fails half the time.
I've had a couple sites that required you to have special characters but some special characters were blacklisted.
In that extremely rare case I just delete the offending characters from my long generated password or add a couple randomly.
Just yesterday my library required a new password. The password requirements were:
When borrowing from the library physically, I need to enter this password on a touchscreen keypad. So no copy and paste from a password manager.
They used to have birthdates as the assigned password for everyone. If you request a password reset, it resets to the birthdate. You have to change it on first login.
A little better than before, but doesn’t feel secure.
On the other hand, abuse is kinda difficult.
For physically loaning books, you need the library card with its RFID chip. For anything digital, there’s no incentive or possibility for abuse really.
Seems like a perfect use case for a password manager.
and when the rule is also wrong example: password must contain special charcters
the password in question contained : and ^
if those aren't special characters idk what is
Often only a few special characters are accepted. Punctuation yes, emoji no.
"Punctuation yes, emoji no" sounds like something a grade school teacher would have embroidered on a throw pillow.
maybe they were looking for extra special characters like 🁄 or ⶸ. Who am I kidding, RFC 1738 tells us that literally everything is unsafe and you know, we need to prepare for the inevitable occasion when the password somehow ends up inside an URL.
The characters "<" and ">" are unsafe because they are used as the delimiters around URLs in free text;
the quote mark (""") is used to delimit URLs in some systems.
The character "#" is unsafe
The character "%" is unsafe
It ends up with
Thus, only alphanumerics, the special characters
$ - _ . + ! * ' ( ) ,
are safe
If the password is going in URLs you already have a problem.
It's safe for https.
In terms of the transport, sure.
But if you put the password in a URL, the user's browser is going to turn around and store that plaintext password in its history, then sync it to the user's other devices, and then pop it up on their screen in the address bar autocomplete, perhaps when the user is screen sharing or streaming to hundreds of people. The browser does not expect a password to be stored there and will mishandle it.
Nah, if you type a password in a url, it gets turned into asterisks. Look: https://google.com/?password********************
I am going put null on my password and you aren't stopping me
Also [object Object] is always a classic to mess with any js
So the users realized their mistakes and stopped complaining……and other jokes public project maintainers tell themselves while laughing in tears
Welcome to Programmer Humor!
This is a place where you can post jokes, memes, humor, etc. related to programming!
For sharing awful code theres also Programming Horror.