Forgot your password?
typodupeerror

Microsoft Wants To Give You A Rorschach 223

Posted by ScuttleMonkey
from the sticky-note-to-put-on-your-monitor dept.
Preedit writes "Microsoft has set up a website that uses inkblot images to help users create passwords. The site asks users view a series of inkblots and write down the first and last letters of whatever word they associate with each inkblot. Then they combine the letters to form a password. Microsoft claims it's a way to create passwords that are easy to remember but hard to crack. But a word of warning, the story notes that Microsoft is collecting and storing users' word associations."
This discussion has been archived. No new comments can be posted.

Microsoft Wants To Give You A Rorschach

Comments Filter:
  • by Qzukk (229616) on Wednesday December 05, 2007 @04:57PM (#21589781) Journal
    view a series of inkblots and write down the first and last letters of whatever word they associate with each inkblot. Then they combine the letters to form a password.

    I got vavavapsva.

    More seriously, if they're saving the word associations, doesn't that mean that they have the password you've just generated?
    • P**n (Score:2, Funny)

      It all looks like porn to me!
      • Re:P**n (Score:5, Interesting)

        by ShieldW0lf (601553) on Wednesday December 05, 2007 @05:36PM (#21590263) Journal
        I usually suggest to people that they come up with a positive self talk phrase, take the first letter of each word, then replace a letter with a number that resembles it.

        Something like "I am a happy person who loves their life." turns into "Iaahpwlt1", which is long, contains numbers and letters and no dictionary words whatsoever.

        You end up repeating it to yourself every time you log in, which serves double duty as both a mnemonic device and a way to preserve your positive attitude.

        • WIuVIftWGA2p0:"When I use Vista I feel the Windows Genuine Advantage 2 point 0"

          You're right I feel better already! Wow everything feels faster! Any more exclamaitions and I'd be using Yahoo!!

        • Re: (Score:3, Funny)

          by flabbergasted (518911)

          I usually suggest to people that they come up with a positive self talk phrase, take the first letter of each word, then replace a letter with a number that resembles it.

          Something like "I am a happy person who loves their life." turns into "Iaahpwlt1", which is long, contains numbers and letters and no dictionary words whatsoever.

          I use mnemonic devices also, but perhaps I should rethink my current "Nobody loves me, I wish I were dead" password. Oh, what's the use. It wouldn't matter anyway.

        • Re: (Score:3, Funny)

          by RealGrouchy (943109)
          A self-motivational phrase whose initials double as a secure password? That's a great idea!

          Here, let me try one:

          People Always Say Something's Wrong Or Really Depressing.

          Awesome! I'll use it on all my accounts!

          - RG>
    • Re: (Score:3, Funny)

      by skeevy (926052)
      vulva vulva vulva penis vulva?

      I'm not sure whether I should be afraid of your mind or the site...
    • by gstoddart (321705)

      I got vavavapsva

      You, sir, have a filthy mind! =)

      Cheers
    • Re: (Score:3, Funny)

      by Chapter80 (926879)

      view a series of inkblots and write down the first and last letters of whatever word they associate with each inkblot. Then they combine the letters to form a password.

      I got ********.

      Mine is h2h2h2h2. [bash.org]
    • ...you really need a girlfriend

    • Re: (Score:2, Funny)

      bbbbbbbbbb

      That all look like butterflies.

    • Re: (Score:3, Funny)

      I got vavavapsva.
      That's amazing! I've got the same combination on my luggage!
    • Re: (Score:3, Funny)

      Ballmers new password: dsdsdsdsds
    • by ceoyoyo (59147)
      And how is that easier to remember than another password? It's also less secure... words in any particular language will preferentially start and end with certain letters.
    • by LoverOfJoy (820058) on Wednesday December 05, 2007 @06:09PM (#21590643) Homepage
      "Emo, what does this inkblot look like to you?"

      I said, "Oh, it's kind of embarrassing."

      He said, "Emo, everyone sees something, so don't be embarrassed. Tell me what the inkblot looks like to you."

      I said, "Well, to me it looks like standard pattern #3 in the Rorschach series to test obsessive compulsiveness." And he gets kind of depressed.

      I said, "Okay, it's a butterfly." And he cheers up.

      He said, "What does this inkblot look like?"

      I said, "It looks like a horrible ugly blob of pure evil that sucks the souls of man into a vortex of sin and degradation."

      He said, "No, um, the inkblot's over there. That's a photo of my wife you're looking at."

      "Oh," I said, "was I far off?" He said, "No. That's the sad part."
    • by houghi (78078)

      I got vavavapsva.


      I got the same. Do n ot blame us, we are not the ones who put thos dirty pictures on line. Come on, imagene that children see those pictures. Doesn't anyboy think of the children, I mean that what has been seen can not be unseen
    • by Gordonjcp (186804)
      Mine had red dots surrounded by smaller pink dots. My password has a lot of G and X in it.
  • by b17bmbr (608864) on Wednesday December 05, 2007 @04:58PM (#21589785)
    microsoft is collecting and storing the data. holy crap, batman, what next. the joker has plans to take over gotham city?
    • Re: (Score:2, Insightful)

      by calebt3 (1098475)
      Even if MS said that they weren't keeping the data, I'm not sure anybody would believe them.
      • by zaf (5944)

        Even if MS said that they weren't keeping the data, I'm not sure anybody would believe them.
        Well, since they say they're keeping it, that probably means they're just going to lose it

    • by yali (209015)
      It's unlikely that they'll be able to learn anything "psychological" about their users in the sense most people would think about it. That's because the Rorschach isn't valid [psychologicalscience.org] for inferring personality or other psychological states.

      More likely it's for a technical analysis. My guess is they want to verify whether there's enough unpredictability [wikipedia.org] in the passwords produced to mean this is a secure method.
      • by spun (1352)

        That's because the Rorschach isn't valid for inferring personality or other psychological states.
        That's debatable. [wikipedia.org] Not that I'm saying the test is any good, just that the issue isn't settled, while you present it as a known fact based on a single study.
        • by yali (209015)
          First of all, the article [psychologicalscience.org] I linked is not a single study. It is a comprehensive, peer-reviewed synthesis of numerous previous studies. I'll take that over a wikipedia article any day.

          Second, "debatable" doesn't really rebut anything, because in science everything is debatable. (If you want to get philosophical [stanford.edu], nothing in science is ever 100% settled.) But as a useful summary of the expert consensus, I stand by what I said. There is very little independent, peer-reviewed evidence that supports the Rorschach
  • by Enlarged to Show Tex (911413) on Wednesday December 05, 2007 @04:59PM (#21589795)
    This method will not create passwords that are strong enough. A truly strong password should have at least three of the following, if not all four:

    Uppercase letters
    Lowercase letters
    Numbers
    Non-Latin characters (i.e. symbols)

    Every password I use has at least three, even for free-registration-required sites...
    • 1a!A

      Don't tell anybody, ok?
    • by oahazmatt (868057) on Wednesday December 05, 2007 @05:12PM (#21589967) Journal

      This method will not create passwords that are strong enough.
      That's why I use the inkblot test, run it through a script that converts random letter combinations to MD5, convert 25% of that end result to l33t, and then randomly add a non-latin character at two locations within that result. I then write it down on my desk calendar.
    • by TubeSteak (669689) on Wednesday December 05, 2007 @05:14PM (#21589999) Journal

      A truly strong password should have at least three of the following, if not all four:
      Only if there's a maximum character limit on the password.

      Or are you going to tell me that
      "atrulystrongpasswordshouldhaveatleastthreeofthefollowingifnotallfour"
      is not a strong password?

      I'm not suggesting everyone should use such a long pass, but what's so hard about implementing passphrases instead of passwords?
      • Or are you going to tell me that
        "atrulystrongpasswordshouldhaveatleastthreeofthefollowingifnotallfour"
        is not a strong password?

        You know, now that you've said that, everyone is going to use it.

        On another note, it would be entertaining wouldn't it. Kind of like making your password "OMFG, how did you guess my password!?"
      • by zsouthboy (1136757) on Wednesday December 05, 2007 @05:59PM (#21590541)
        I also highly suggest, right now, that everyone change your passwords to currentpassword x 3 or 4, or more:

        For example, is passwordpasswordpassword any harder to remember than just password?

        But it greatly expands the key space to be searched for anyone trying to brute force...
      • by Anonymous Coward
        "Most people use passwords. Some people use passphrases. Bruce Schneier uses an epic passpoem, detailing the life and works of seven mythical Norse heroes."
      • by ImaLamer (260199)
        That's why I used song lyrics for a while.

        "wecandanceifyouwanttowecanleaveyourfriendsbehind"

        Then sweeten it up with leet stuff like:

        "w3c4nd4nc31fy0uw4ntt0w3c4nl34v3y0urfr13ndsb3h1nd!"

        It's not only strong, but catchy!
      • Re: (Score:3, Insightful)

        by AeroIllini (726211)
        Because many people have trouble typing their own names correctly without using the backspace key a few times, and typing a password in a box gives no visual feedback. Higher letter count gives a higher chance of typos, and a higher chance of getting locked out after typing "atrulystrongpasswordshouldhaveatleastthreeoftehfollowingifnotallfour" five times in a row.

        Chances of a typo are even higher if someone routinely types in MS Word with AutoComplete turned on and is now physically incapable of typing "the
        • Chances of a typo are even higher if someone routinely types in MS Word with AutoComplete turned on and is now physically incapable of typing "the", "from", or any number of words correctly the first time.

          Actually, just so long as they are consistent, that's a GoodThing (TM). After all, "atrulystrongpasswordshouldhaveatleastthreeoftehfollowingifnotfour" is a more secure password than "atrulystrongpasswordshouldhaveatleastthreeofthefollowingifnotfour". Even more secure would be "atrulystrongpasswordsshoul

      • Re: (Score:3, Interesting)

        by twifosp (532320)

        but what's so hard about implementing passphrases instead of passwords?

        I agree with you, but the problem for the average user is that they are not touch typers. They are constantly looking at the keyboard and screen to confirm what they have typed. As the length of the password increases, the odds that a typing error is going to be made also goes up. As passwords are blocked out, it would be very frusterating to a person who has to look at the screen to confirm what they have typed and backspaces often.

    • Re: (Score:3, Insightful)

      by Rakishi (759894)

      A truly strong password should have at least three of the following, if not all four:
      Not really, you can just make you password longer and you are just as secure.
    • Re: (Score:3, Informative)

      by eldavojohn (898314) *
      That's not the only problem. If you read the research paper [microsoft.com][PDF Warning] from 2004 (pretty old stuff actually), they state:

      In both experiments, users missed at most one association, even after having not used the system for one week. Thus it may be advisable to modify the system to allow for successful authentications when k out of a possible n associations are correct. Assuming that all blots produce an equal distribution on responses, this reduces the security of passwords to the level of the original system with only k blots. Therefore, it might be advantageous for users to have to enter associations for more blots. A disadvantage of this approach, however, is that authentication would take longer.

      As of interest may also be their conclusion:

      Our preliminary data suggest that inkblot authentication offers a potentially significant improvement over existing widely-deployed user authentication mechanisms. In addition to gathering our quantitative results, we also asked users who had taken part in our experiments for their comments on the system. In almost all cases we received the same response: the users were happily shocked that they could remember such a "huge password." In fact, many users asked if there were any plans to allow the use of the system in their production environment. This kind of positive user experience is arguably as important to the eventual adoption, acceptance and scrupulous use of an alternative password system as any measure of security. More experiments would help confirm or discount our security and memorability results, and could answer such questions as: How many inkblots (that is, how much entropy) can be used before the resulting passwords are no longer memorable? What is the best way to help users retain their inkblot associations? What inkblot-to-character hash function generates the most entropy without sacrificing ease of use? And what inkblot generation algorithms create inkblots with the highest-entropy (or the fewest low-entropy) association spaces?
      While inkblot authentication should be quite easy to deploy in a wide variety of settings, there exist some environments (such as devices with tiny screens) where it is unworkable, and alternatives are needed. Adapting the inkblot password scheme to other password-using contexts, such as those in which the user interface is under the control of a (possibly uncooperative or legacy) application, may also require some innovative thinking.

    • Re: (Score:3, Insightful)

      26^10 > 95^5. Even if you restrict your password to only a few characters, you can get the same level of security as with many characters. You just need far more of them. Think about it: when we strip off all of our abstractions, everything is stored as 1s and 0s, right? (Note: Parent's point is good and right, if your password must be short, or you don't want to spend time doing the inkblot test, or you don't want to have to remember 90 characters.)
    • by ChatHuant (801522) on Wednesday December 05, 2007 @05:34PM (#21590241)
      This method will not create passwords that are strong enough. A truly strong password should have at least three of the following, if not all four:
      Uppercase letters
      Lowercase letters
      Numbers
      Non-Latin characters (i.e. symbols)


      That's just not true. Admins request this kind of nonsense to force a bigger password space with shorter passwords. Informally, the security of your password is given by the number of random bits you have. With ASCII passwords using only lowercase letters, you're adding less than 5 bits of randomness per character. Even worse, most people use real words as passwords, so they can remember them easily. That reduces the randomness even more and makes dictionary attacks feasible. Adding uppercase, numbers and symbols gives you an extra bit or two of randomness per character, but makes the password much more difficult to remember.

      Microsoft's method works around the password memorization by using the inkblots. The security is given by the much larger size of the resulting password. They get a password of 20 lowercase characters, say about 100 bits of randomness (less than that, because not all letter combinations are equiprobable - very few words I know begin and end with a q for example). A totally random password consisting of a mix of 10 symbols, numbers and different cased letters only gives you a bit less than 70 bits of randomness.
    • by davidsyes (765062)
      Turn the entire, pulse-thumpin' body into the password.

      Or, derive the password password from one of those machine kids dance to in malls. Lens overhead, objects move, then feet keep up. How you jiggle and wiggle structures your password. This might be safe for OLPC.

      But, adult-oriented password/action access can be derived from thrust-n-strut gyrations, maybe in a chair. Sorta like responding to a lapdance (without touching the computer) to eventually gain access to the computer's ass sets. This might be saf
    • by ceoyoyo (59147)
      Thank you, you've just weakened your password.

      A truly strong password MAY have all of those. If you REQUIRE that it do so, then you weaken the password.
    • Wouldn't the strongest passwords be random, within the largest character set practical to type? Any further rule would reduce the search space.
  • Hmmmm .... (Score:5, Interesting)

    by gstoddart (321705) on Wednesday December 05, 2007 @05:00PM (#21589805) Homepage
    From TFA:

    "A century of psychological literature indicates that inkblot associations are intimately personal, and our own user studies verify that users almost always describe the same inkblots quite differently"

    So, psyche 101 was a long time ago, and that's the extent of my exposure to it.

    Do individual people respond to the same inkblots, the same way over time? Or might I see the same splotch in 3 months and associate something else with it? If there's drift over time, this wouldn't be such a good idea.

    Anyone with a better schooling in human psychology care to chime in?

    Cheers

    • Re: (Score:3, Interesting)

      by dgatwood (11270)

      I don't know, but about three years ago, I recall suggesting the use of non-abstract images and measuring the brain's electrical response to determine a map of the user's response to a given stimulus. After the system was trained properly, you could use that to be a really, really solid passphrase; while your brain may react a bit differently to images over time, it isn't likely to react dramatically differently for the most part (except maybe after head trauma or something similarly extreme). This seems

      • I recall suggesting the use of non-abstract images and measuring the brain's electrical response to determine a map of the user's response to a given stimulus.
        [snip]
        This seems like a somewhat more practical way of doing the same basic thing.

        So much for having a few beers during lunch.

        Unless, of course, the initial measurement is done when I'm already buzzed... in which case I'll need to have a bloody mary every morning in order to get started at work...

        Idea intriguing, newsletter please.

      • by lahvak (69490)
        I would expect your reactions to differ over time, but I would not expect them to change dramatically in a short period of time

        Hmm, when I tried it half an hour ago, they all looked like pizzas. Now all I see there are pillows.
      • by tedrlord (95173)

        I would expect your reactions to differ over time, but I would not expect them to change dramatically in a short period of time, and that's the key to such a system.
        Unless you started hanging out on 4chan all of a sudden. That really warps your brain's response to viewing images.
    • by hhr (909621)
      Your questions are their questions. This is a research project and not a production service. They are collecting data to find the answers.
    • by pluther (647209)

      Do individual people respond to the same inkblots, the same way over time? Or might I see the same splotch in 3 months and associate something else with it?

      Yes, they change over time. It is common to use the same test several months apart to gauge the effectiveness of ongoing therapy.

      In the actual Rorschach ink blot test, what you see is almost immaterial compared to how you see it. If this system uses its own inkblots it is likely that some of them are particularly evocative of specific images (even

  • by daninspokane (1198749) on Wednesday December 05, 2007 @05:01PM (#21589815)
    The blots are coded to shut your brain down if you don't have a valid regkey.
    • by sm62704 (957197)
      Holy shit, you're right! They all look like women [slashdot.org] (or their private parts) to me!

      -mcgrew
      • Yeah. But don't feel bad. They're the ones who are showing you all the dirty pictures.

        I have actually always been more intrigued as to whether or not an amalgamation of responses would indicate a physiological predisposition in humans to see particular images, rather than indicating what any particular individual might see. Especially since, anecdotally, everyone but the crazies always see sexual images or butterflies.

        I believe, however, that other research has already demonstrated this with more prec

  • For those who haven't seen it, Perry Bible Fellowship's [pbfcomics.com] take on this. [pbfcomics.com]
  • random? (Score:3, Funny)

    by clarkn0va (807617) <(moc.liamg) (ta) (teg.tpa)> on Wednesday December 05, 2007 @05:04PM (#21589873) Homepage
    Respond with "butterfly" and share your password with half the english-speaking planet.

    db

  • by Eberlin (570874) on Wednesday December 05, 2007 @05:05PM (#21589885) Homepage
    Anyone wanna bet Ballmer's word list looks a bit like this:
    chair
    developers
    chair
    banana
    ooohshiny
    developers!
    developers!
    developers!
  • Storing and insecure (Score:5, Informative)

    by tkdtaylor (1039822) on Wednesday December 05, 2007 @05:06PM (#21589891)
    It's a research project so of course it's storing the responses.
    From the actual site:

    Security and privacy of this service

    InkblotPassword.com is a research project deployed by Microsoft Research. It is for demonstration and research purposes only. You are welcome to try it out, but we make absolutely no promise that our implementation will protect your password. Don't use your account here to protect any data you care about, from money to your reputation. We also make no promise that the site will continue running. Should the service prove successful, Microsoft may consider offering the service as a commercial product or service. For now, consider it an unreliable, insecure service run by a couple research coneheads in their spare time, and trust it accordingly.
  • Wait... (Score:5, Interesting)

    by ucblockhead (63650) on Wednesday December 05, 2007 @05:06PM (#21589895) Homepage Journal
    So they have created a method for creating hard to crack passwords while simultaneously collecting the data to more easily crack them?
  • No way.... (Score:2, Funny)

    by Bobfrankly1 (1043848)

    Microsoft Wants To Give You A Rorschach


    If this is anything like a wet willy, I don't want one, and you can't make me.
    *runs away screaming*
  • From TFA:

    Given that many Internet users employ the same password to gain access to dozens of Web sites, for everything from banking and shopping to socializing, it's more important than ever that they create passwords that are at once highly secure and easy to remember.

    It's even more important that people not do this. If your password is the same for 15 different sites, and one of those sites gets hacked (or even phished, or someone keylogs your password) suddenly that hacker has access to your account at

  • by Culture20 (968837) on Wednesday December 05, 2007 @05:11PM (#21589965)

    "Nothing prevents a user from learning a strong password on Inkblotpassword.com and then reusing it at other sites," Microsoft's researchers said.

    Common sense might.
  • by Cytlid (95255) on Wednesday December 05, 2007 @05:13PM (#21589975)
    ...is penguins.
  • Captcha (Score:5, Interesting)

    by GreggBz (777373) on Wednesday December 05, 2007 @05:16PM (#21590019) Homepage
    That site [inkblotpassword.com] has one of the best captcha's I've ever seen.

    Please select all the cats. Pictures supplied (and sponsored) by petfinder.com. Brilliant. Even HAL-9000 might not be able to do that.
    • by RobBebop (947356)

      Identifying the cats was hands down the better half of the inkblot website game. Once I got to the password part, I decided it was too stupid to continue with.

      Something that still needs working... okay, I passed the CAPTCHA once, but my request failed (in the case of this website, the username I typed had already been chosen). I then had to change my username choice and re-authenticate myself by finding more cats. Yet, as far as I could tell, I am still human.

      A similar thing bugs me about Ticketmaste

    • Yeah, the captcha was cool, but most of the pictures I couldn't see the top 1/5 or so of them. I guess 1024x768 is now considered so pathetically low it's no longer worth making your site work properly with it...
  • This is just a beta test for the m$ psychological evaluation system.
  • (obligatory link for the uninformed)

    Rorschach Inkblot Test [wikipedia.org]

  • I thought strong passwords avoided the use of words as they are subject to brute force dictionary attacks. An e.g. 8 character output of this method may be marginally more secure than one or two words that total 8 characters, but it is also very susceptible to a dictionary attack, maybe even more so as there is a good chance that animals and shapes would be the words chosen (not colours, names of people, verbs etc.).
  • Rorschach? Is that like a wedgie?
  • The image associations are not only unique to the user, they're also "hard to forget," the researchers said. "After typing her password several times, a user develops 'muscle memory' and can log in quickly without referring to the inkblot images," they said.

    No shit. Type any password enough times your fingers learn where the keys are, even if you're not consciously thinking about what you're typing.

    So their aim is to have you look at the inkblots, work out your passwords, type the password until your finger
  • Dot Matrix...

    Is this really new?

    Eventually it'll be something done by Open Source from the future SeaCode employees...

    But, also, hasn't this been show in Sci-Fi shows? (No, I'm not talking about "cheating" to make a result/action appear on screen). It would be ghastly if a patent is "awarded" for this...
  • I use a keyboard pattern mnemonic for all my passwords that I change every six months (work-pattern, bank-pattern, overseas accounts pattern ...).

    Any 12 characters (1a...!A...) I never repeat, but I always recall, because of the pattern matching I must always recall the first character to enter, then I follow the appropriate pattern-match.

    When I take vacation and return to the office two weeks later ... I sometimes forget the pwd, but I always guess right by the third time (most on second try).

    Example: c6b
  • The phrase "Microsoft Genuine Password Advantage" scrolled through my mind and I was afraid.

    Possible Microsoft ink-blot results:

    • A woman with large breasts
    • A woman with small breasts
    • Steve Ballmer with breasts
    • Harry telling me I'm not good enough
    • Harry telling me I can't marry his daughter
  • Microsoft is collecting and storing users' word associations

    So essentially this is a phishing site, and they're telling you that up front. Of course MS is aware that if you take a sample 1000 people who have fallen for a phishing scam in the past and send them to this inkblot password site with a disclosure that their password will be recorded, 1000 of these will go ahead and use it anyway. It's a great way to do as the criminals do, and through a simple legal disclosure it's no longer a crime.

    db

  • Pin numbers:
    Open a large book on random pages and note down the LAST digit. Repeat until the pin is long enough.

    For passphrases:
    Pick a book, open it on a random page and note down the first word on that page longer than 3 characters. Generate 2 pass phrases this way and insert the acronym of one of them into the other. Add some random special characters and numbers at random places (i.e chosen as for pin numbers ).

    May well be vulnerabilities in there, but if you know enough about computer security to avoid
    • by geekoid (135745)
      That's a horrible way to get a pin.
      Think of somethings relevant to you.
      ex:
      I have the:
      9th sign
      31 st is the date of my favorite holiday
      9 was how old I was win my dog was put down.

      9319

      use things that are common, but not something hyou would bother to talk about. Keep it in your wallet.
  • Example:
    My brothers initals ar JaL and FdL
    My Wifes Birthday and month 01/01
    My first toby was 'Toby'
    dd a letter to rotate

    yb0T0101JaLFdLa

    Bam, I just created personal and hard password. The bibbes argument against that is that 'everybody knows all about you'. In that case, this information is just noise in the data.

    or
    !5b00B_g1B
    Easy to remember for a human.
    No, none of the information given in the example is accurate.

    Also, put the password in your wallet. You do not need to put what the password is to, you'll re
  • is that although the directions clearly tell you to put in the first and last letters of the word the inkblot makes you think of, you can input numbers, common symbols, and even weird symbols ( and f are both considered valid inputs, for instance) and it doesn't even flinch. I suspect these researchers are going to have to sift through a LOT of bad data to get any kind of meaningful results.
  • WTF? Yet another annoying captcha. Half the pictures are so shitty I can't tell if it's a dog or a cat.

    I'm just leaving my password at "changeme" and getting on with my life.
  • by cenonce (597067) <anthony_t&mac,com> on Wednesday December 05, 2007 @08:36PM (#21591951)
    That is just silly... I spend too much time trying to think of what these inkblots look like, and some of them really don't look like anything.

    Try a leet password generator [goodpassword.com]... way easier to remember!

Mathematicians stand on each other's shoulders. -- Gauss

Working...