Re^10: encrypt passwords

I'd tell him the truth.
Depending upon my read of the situation and the man, I'd likely do it in the form of a formal report.
If I felt it necessary, I'd copy his boss on it.
I'd demonstrate that any pure Perl solution is trivially defeated with minimum effort and knowledge.
I'd hide a password behind 3 levels of secure encryption, and run the script as:
```
perl -d:Trace theScript.pl | find "DBI->connect"
[download]
```
And watch the decoded password pop into view.
I'd then offer him a binary solution as a "stop gap" measure, to be used at his own risk.
And I'd want pre-absolution for any and all failures; in writing, before I coded it.

With the rise and rise of 'Social' network sites: 'Computers are making people easier to use everyday'

Examine what is said, not who speaks -- Silence betokens consent -- Love the truth but pardon error.

"Science is about questioning the status quo. Questioning authority". I'm with torvalds on this

In the absence of evidence, opinion is indistinguishable from prejudice. Agile (and TDD) debunked

Comment on Re^10: encrypt passwords Select or Download Code

Replies are listed 'Best First'.
Re^11: encrypt passwords by marinersk (Priest) on Apr 19, 2015 at 02:53 UTC
Okay. The depths to which you will go to stick to your guns on this surprises me just a bit; but, as usual, your answer is sound. All of this was hypothetical anyway, so it's definitely not worth the time I've dragged us into spending on it. Other than, perhaps, getting to know you a bit better, which I find valuable. I've had many points in my career where I stuck to my guns due to a fervent belief that a thing was important, so I certainly can't fault you for the trait.	[reply]
Re^12: encrypt passwords by Anonymous Monk on Apr 19, 2015 at 05:41 UTC
All of this was hypothetical anyway, so it's definitely not worth the time I've dragged us into spending on it. Other than, perhaps, getting to know you a bit better, which I find valuable. Valiant effort :) good discussion is always worth the time	[reply]