F1 2012 Vip Pass Code Generator
Christal Rasband
The LastPass password generator creates random passwords based on parameters set by you. Parameters include password length, whether the password should be easy to say or read, and whether the password should have uppercase letters, lowercase letters, numbers, and symbols.
Yes. The LastPass password generator creates random, secure passwords based on the parameters defined by you. Any password generated is tested against the industry-standard zxcvbn library to determine how strong the password you generate is.
No. The browser and in-app password generator function the same. The only difference is that the in-app generator will also autofill and save the created password for you. Whereas with the online generator, you must copy your password and paste it into the necessary form field.
Use a password generator to create strong, random passwords. When creating a new password, you can choose how long and how complex you want it to be. The generator will create a strong password that meets your specifications.
Your online world revolves around logins and passwords. To stay safe from data breaches, you need to create strong and unique passwords for every account, but remembering them all without help gets tricky.
When using strong and unique passwords, the best way to manage them is to use a secure password manager. A password manager makes it easy to protect yourself and your online data. It allows you to generate and store long, complex passwords for each site while only having to remember one master password (the one that unlocks your password manager account).
Bitwarden is the ideal choice for a password manager as it offers plans for individuals and businesses with cross-platform access for mobile, browser, and desktop applications. Bitwarden generates, stores, and secures your most important digital assets in an end-to-end encrypted vault.
As I was doing test driven development I pondered whether a hypothetical program could be completely developed by generated code based on tests. i.e. is there an ability to have a generator that creates the code specifically to pass tests. Would the future of programming languages just be to write tests?
I think this would be a tough one as, at least for the initial generations of such technology, developers would be very skeptical of generated code's correctness. So human review would have to be involved as well.
As a simple illustration of what I mean, suppose you write 10 tests for a function, with sample inputs and expected outputs covering every scenario you can think of. A program could trivially generate code which passed all of these tests with nothing more than a rudimentary switch statement (your ten inputs matched to their expected outputs). This code would obviously not be correct, but it would take a human to see that.
That's just a simple example. It isn't hard to imagine more sophisticated programs which might not generate a switch statement but still produce solutions that aren't actually correct, and which could be wrong in much more subtle ways. Hence my suggestion that any technology along these lines would be met with a deep level of skepticism, at least at first.
If code can be generated completely, then the basis of the generator would have to be a specification that exactly describes the code. This generator would then be something like a compiler that cross compiles one language into an other.
Tests are not such a language. They only assert that a specific aspect of the code functionality is valid and unchanged. By doing so they scaffold the code so that it does not break, even when it is refactored.
1) If the generator works correctly, then the specification is always transferred into correct code. I postulate that this code is tested by design and needs no additional test. Better TDD the generator than the generated code.
3) You can combine both ways of development. Generate a program framework with a tested generator from a specification and then enrich the generated code by using TDD. Attention: You then have two different development cycles running in one project. That means, you have to ensure that you always can regenerate the generated code when specifications change und that your additional code still correctly fits into the generated code.
Just one small example: Imagine a tool that can generate code from an UML class diagram. This could be done in an way that you can develop the methods with TDD, but the structure of the classes is defined in UML and you would not need to test this again.
Does this mean that the resulting code will always write to /some/file? Does it mean that the resulting code should always write to /some/file2? Either could be true. What if it needs to only do the minimal set to get the tests to pass? Without knowing the context and writing very exact and bounding tests, no code could figure out (at this point in time) what the test author intended.
In my project, I have added the function, with some adjustments, so that it allows two parameters. The text (in my case I am passing the text input element that holds the text) to be encoded and the id name of the element where the code will be displayed. You can use the second function to clear the code element:
Alternatively to the data-binding/dmx.parse you can set the value you want in a global variable (create in App structure by clicking App > Define Global Data) and access it through
dmx.global.get('variable name');
and alter it using
dmx.global.set('variable name', 'new value');
That way the value is available in both the data pickers and the custom js
I wrote a simple Data generation library ages ago to mock up some data we needed, you could take a look at that to get some ideas. You provide it with a pattern which you want to generate and it will create random data to match that pattern.
This is the main logic
EDIT: Reading through your requirements again I think you should be able to alter my code to get it to work. You would need to create a pattern that matches the minimum character/number requirements for a valid password, add logic to vary the length of the generated password by adding in random characters, and perhaps add some random sort logic at the end to mix the characters up so that they are not always in the same pattern.
I am aware of several ways QR code generators could pass "hidden" information "around" the QR spec. For example, if you can use the masking in a spec to ignore an area where you plan to put a logo, then you could just as easily put information there.
However, in any of these schemes, the "hidden" information would only be useful to someone who knows how to read "around" the spec too. For example, humans recognize logos as a visual language that has nothing to do with the QR code spec. But, for the QR code generator to pass info around the spec, something would have to read around the spec, which I'm not really worried about.
I'm more worried about the analog of a cookie or google analytics code or something that passes information about me when I use an online generator to create a QR code, but is never shown to me explicitly. For example, if the generator encoded their address and then my QR code reader (say in chrome on my phone), colluded to pass information back to the code generator about me (or my users of my code) when they scan it without showing that information to me or the user of my QR code. (Obviously, I could QR encode a link with query parameters in it or something that could be used to gather information, but I would see that when I create the link and my user would see that when they use the link (if they stop to actually inspect it)).
My concern is if there is any allowance in the spec for hidden information or if there's any known commercial practice between generators and scanners to collude in passing around information they don't show to me or my users.
It is possible to sneak some "steganography-alike" data in QR-code on encoding level. Example - intentionally invert some bits (squares) in data area of QR-code. They will be detected and silently corrected during read, therefore payload won't be affected, but you can identify modified bits and gain hidden knowledge i.e. from their position.
Hello there! I'm a bit new to qualtrics, so don't quite know how customizable some of this stuff is.
I'm planning on sending out a parent-student survey, where responses will be anonymous but I would like to be able to keep the parent's results linked to their respective student.
The best idea I've had so far is to, on the same page where parents will sign for consent ('page 1' of the student survey), include a random password generator (something 4-5 characters long, nothing complicated) and a link for the parents to click to head to the parent survey. When they follow that link, they would then be asked to enter in that same password so that I'll be able to match the parents with the students at a later date. That randomly generated code would also need to be auto-populated into a similar field in the students survey, of course.
How should I go about doing this? Or perhaps there's a less round-about way of sending out linked surveys I don't know about?
Hi Tes
I had to test if I could solve this and I actually just did. So there is a way that potentially could solve this for you.
The way I set this up is to have one Student-survey and another Parent-survey. And I need to assume that you know both StudentEmail and ParentEmail.
The Student survey holds embedded data that randomly gives a number, and another embedded data that captures that number.
In my survey flow I set it like this:
"Int" is the random number between 1 and 1500 (you can change these of course), and the "Inte" is the one that captures the random number that was given the Survey response.
Once that is done you set up a workflow within the student-survey where an email is triggered once a survey response comes in and sent to the ParentEmail.
This is what my test looked like:
In this email is a link to the Parent-Survey and the link contains the random number given in the student-email as embedded data.
The survey link for the email to the parents could look like this:
https://[your domain]/jfe/form/[survey ID]?ParentEmail=$e://Field/ParentEmail&Inte=$e://Field/Int
(This is for testing purposes of course. You can add what ever embedded data you want here.)
This way the student-survey get a random number, that is then passed to the parent-survey and registered on their response so you can compare the two during your analysis.
Hope this helps and if there are questions just reach out!
All the best
-Mattias