Prettier would do this anyway, but it’s separated out for a more
reviewable diff. Generated by ESLint.
Signed-off-by: Anders Kaseorg <anders@zulip.com>
Prettier would do this anyway, but it’s separated out for a more
reviewable diff. Generated by ESLint.
Signed-off-by: Anders Kaseorg <anders@zulip.com>
Explicitly stubbing i18n in 48 different files
is mostly busy work at this point, and it doesn't
provide much signal, since often it's invoked
only to satisfy transitive dependencies.
ES6 and TS modules don’t insert themselves into `window`, so our tests
shouldn’t insert them either. Since the test `window` behaves like
`global` now, we can rely on legacy modules that do insert themselves
to do it themselves.
Signed-off-by: Anders Kaseorg <anders@zulipchat.com>
This commit was originally automatically generated using `tools/lint
--only=eslint --fix`. It was then modified by tabbott to contain only
changes to a set of files that are unlikely to result in significant
merge conflicts with any open pull request, excluding about 20 files.
His plan is to merge the remaining changes with more precise care,
potentially involving merging parts of conflicting pull requests
before running the `eslint --fix` operation.
Signed-off-by: Anders Kaseorg <anders@zulipchat.com>
This run_test helper sets up a convention that allows
us to give really short tracebacks for errors, and
eventually we can have more control over running
individual tests. (The latter goal has some
complications, since we often intentionally leak
setup in tests.)
The original "quality score" was invented purely for populating
our password-strength progress bar, and isn't expressed in terms
that are particularly meaningful. For configuration and the core
accept/reject logic, it's better to use units that are readily
understood. Switch to those.
I considered using "bits of entropy", defined loosely as the log
of this number, but both the zxcvbn paper and the linked CACM
article (which I recommend!) are written in terms of the number
of guesses. And reading (most of) those two papers made me
less happy about referring to "entropy" in our terminology.
I already knew that notion was a little fuzzy if looked at
too closely, and I gained a better appreciation of how it's
contributed to confusion in discussing password policies and
to adoption of perverse policies that favor "Password1!" over
"derived unusual ravioli raft". So, "guesses" it is.
And although the log is handy for some analysis purposes
(certainly for a graph like those in the zxcvbn paper), it adds
a layer of abstraction, and I think makes it harder to think
clearly about attacks, especially in the online setting. So
just use the actual number, and if someone wants to set a
gigantic value, they will have the pleasure of seeing just
how many digits are involved.
(Thanks to @YJDave for a prototype that the code changes in this
commit are based on.)
Anders Kaseorg
Steve Howell
Anders Kaseorg
Greg Price
Vishnu Ks
Joshua Pan
Steve Howell