I can understand how QPWDLMTCHR would be a little tough to implement into
QPWDRULES. The format is incompatible. In that case, however, they
should have not started ignoring it. They could have easily added a
*RQDDIFn where n is
0=Can be the same as old passwords
1=Cannot be the same as last 32
2=Cannot be the same as last 24
3=Cannot be the same as last 18
4=Cannot be the same as last 12
5=Cannot be the same as last 10
6=Cannot be the same as last 8
7=Cannot be the same as last 6
8=Cannot be the same as last 4
Or something more sensible, (like 4=4). And dropped QPWDRQDDIF, but they
didn't. Why drop something they didn't handle right here (without having
to delve into exit points) in QPWDLMTCHR yet not handle QPWDRQDDIF?

Try opening up a pmr.

Rob Berendt

As an Amazon Associate we earn from qualifying purchases.

This thread ...


Follow On AppleNews
Return to Archive home page | Return to MIDRANGE.COM home page

This mailing list archive is Copyright 1997-2022 by and David Gibbs as a compilation work. Use of the archive is restricted to research of a business or technical nature. Any other uses are prohibited. Full details are available on our policy page. If you have questions about this, please contact [javascript protected email address].

Operating expenses for this site are earned using the Amazon Associate program and Google Adsense.