Re: [Otpasswd-talk] Some questions

[Tomasz bla Fortuna]

Dnia Mon, 4 Jan 2010 03:27:08 +0100
Tomasz bla Fortuna <address@hidden> napisał(a):

> > 8. I think that the --flag interface on otpasswd probably should
> > accept key-value pairs.  I think that would give added flexibility,
> > and probably clean the interface a little.  So, for example,
> > 
> >      $ otpasswd -f codelength:4
> >      $ otpasswd --flag=codelength:8
> >      $ otpasswd --flag=alphabet-size:43,codelength:5  
> I like the idea of ':' really. This can even be switched to '='. But
> your third example is hard to code without major rewrite (getopt won't
> like it). Still I can easily get something like this:
>       $ otpasswd -f codelength=4
>       $ otpasswd --flag codelength=8
>       $ otpasswd --flag alphabet=3 -f codelength=5
>       $ otpasswd --flag alphabet=list
> (As the alphabet is precised by ID currently not by length).
> 
> What do you think?

I'll try implementing this like this for now:

Configuration:
  -f, --flag <arg>
           Manages various settings:
           list          print current state and configuration.
           show=<on|off> configure visibility of passcode during
                         authentication.
           alphabet=<ID|list>
                         select passcode alphabet. Use 'list' argument
                         to get IDs of available alphabets.
           codelenght=<length>
                         select passcode length.

           contact=X     Set contact info (e.g. phone number) with
                         which to receive a passcode during
           authentication. Details depends configuration. Use "" to
           disable. label=X       Set a caption to use on generated
           passcards. Use "" to set default (hostname)

           salt=<on|off>
                         Meaningful only during key generation.
                         Enable/disable salting of a passcode counter.
                         Disabling this option will make program
                         compatible with PPPv3.1 and will increase
                         available passcard number at the cost of
                         (theoretically) less security.

What do you think? Any ideas of improving this approach? Is for sure
better that previous.

-- 
Tomasz bla Fortuna
jid: bla(at)af.gliwice.pl
pgp: 0x90746E79 @ pgp.mit.edu
www: http://bla.thera.be

signature.asc
Description: PGP signature