[1][2][3][4] ---> [2][4][1][3]
now consider if within each subset additional characteristics
could be modified, such that set 2 is mirrored by vertically
by the letters that obey these principles... and set 1 has its
letters in reverse... and sets 3 and 4 are rotated 180 degrees
[pass]-[wo]-[r]-[ds] ---> [mo]-[sp]-[ssap]-[J]
and that this could also be dynamic and change, for a given
instantiation of the base password as it is mediated for login,
as an ever-changing password with its own variability which
could change daily given, say, a range of 30 such criteria
that may or may not be accessible in various combinations
then rulesets would be important, what if some letters can be
transformed and others cannot, are substitutions chosen or
are only some characters changed, or how to deal with a
character with multiple options for superposition translation
this kind of exponential potential for passwords in a context
where the simple model is so simple to allow easy hacking,
what if systems were designed to be significantly more difficult
to access and that /time/ was leveraged to limit unauthorized
access and to limit, via relativism, what can be seen in a given
threshold or timeframe, to potentially make it impossible for
automated attacks of logins via brute-force via zombie-nets,
by making the odds more the opposite of what they are today,
given access, enough time and dictionaries, versus limiting
the exploitable window, limiting the time frame, and use of
dictionaries via increased variability that is never static, and
thus each login could tend more towards 1 in a million guess,
by chance, and have that be the repeated situation encountered
at login, versus allowing 10 million attempts to gain illegal access
it just seems common sense that perhaps it is made to be broken
and that without such introducing or allowing parameters of such
increased difficulty, that perhaps it is the design of the ecosystem itself
versus its merit in terms of 'actual security' versus what is allowable,
thus making the password issue itself that of a false perspective,
as if 8-12 alphanumerics w/special characters is maxing out possibilities
when instead limiting the questions to those parameters may force
another approach prematurely, which could be even worse, policy-wise
😺 😶 😈