Crapita At It Again...

[Great Parks]

Finally got it submitted.

It was bombing out when I was submitting my address history.

I can't remember any exact dates to but in the from/to date so I was just selecting the 31st for each month. Of course, their datepicker allows you to pick 31 November which then blows up server side .

Taxi!

[northernladuk]

Finally got it submitted.

It was bombing out when I was submitting my address history.

I can't remember any exact dates to but in the from/to date so I was just selecting the 31st for each month. Of course, their datepicker allows you to pick 31 November which then blows up server side .

Taxi!

So the problem was rank stupidity in the end? Inneresting.

[ladymuck]

Maybe I'm just a saddo but I have a file that lists all my previous addresses and dates I lived in them. I have a similar file for every contract I've had.

They come in handy occasionally.

[Great Parks]

So the problem was rank stupidity in the end? Inneresting.

So you think a "date picker" on a govt website that is a dropdown containing the nos 1-31, a dropdown containing the months of the year & another dropdown conataining every year back to 1900 that allows user's to select any combination with no validation is acceptable?

I wouldn't even let that out the door for the booking system I maintain for my local squash club.

[northernladuk]

Maybe I'm just a saddo but I have a file that lists all my previous addresses and dates I lived in them. I have a similar file for every contract I've had.

They come in handy occasionally.

So do I

[OwlHoot]

So you think a "date picker" on a govt website that is a dropdown containing the nos 1-31, a dropdown containing the months of the year & another dropdown conataining every year back to 1900 that allows user's to select any combination with no validation is acceptable?

I wouldn't even let that out the door for the booking system I maintain for my local squash club.

Nothing surprises me about amateurish websites! They still seem to be the rule rather than exceptions.

You'd be amazed (well probably not, come to think of it) at the number of password prompts that allow only alphanumeric characters! I mean FFS

Not long ago, I had to enter a password to register with some website, and it accepted the longish password I chose. Later, when I tried to log in, it said my password was invalid (not "user or password is invalid", which is all it should have said, but that is a mere detail) Anyway, having a hunch it might have truncated the password, I tried successively shorter leading substrings to log in, until the six-character one worked!

What do you do with clueless idiots like whoever wrote that rubbish? I bet it also stored passwords in plain text!

[Great Parks]

Nothing surprises me about amateurish websites! They still seem to be the rule rather than exceptions.

You'd be amazed (well probably not, come to think of it) at the number of password prompts that allow only alphanumeric characters! I mean FFS

Not long ago, I had to enter a password to register with some website, and it accepted the longish password I chose. Later, when I tried to log in, it said my password was invalid (not "user or password is invalid", which is all it should have said, but that is a mere detail) Anyway, having a hunch it might have truncated the password, I tried successively shorter leading substrings to log in, until the six-character one worked!

What do you do with clueless idiots like whoever wrote that rubbish? I bet it also stored passwords in plain text!

A government website shouldn't be amateurish though!

But, yes - I see many examples of the kind of thing you highlighted in your post every day.

Particular bugbears of mine include sites with case sensitive usernames (only a password is case sensitive in my world!) and sites with fields that don't strip out whitespace. You know the one where you copy a password from an email and paste it in with a bit of superfluous whitespace & you get Access Denied. Had me scratching my head a few times that one!