One checked login is not a destroyed shared password

Lesson map

Lesson 10. Map, example, EX056.

flowchart TD
  O["One unnamed volunteer knew the shared password"] --> D["Individual logins and two-step verification"]
  D --> R["Ruth's own login passed one check"]
  R --> Q{"Is the old password shown as destroyed?"}
  Q -->|No| K["Do not write the password, and do not name the volunteer"]

A successful sign-in on one account does not certify every other account.

Logical drawing

old single point
    one volunteer knows the shared social password
    that person is not named
design of the fix
    individual logins
    two-step verification
    recovery details held by the charity manager
check
    Ruth signs in on her own account
    two-step verification works for that sign-in
        |
        +-- one account is not every account
        +-- destruction of the shared password is not in the file
        +-- the password is not written down

Learning outcomes

After this chapter, you should be able to:

1. Keep Ruth's two-step check as a check of her own login.
2. Leave the old shared password's destruction unstated.
3. Name neither the password nor the volunteer who knew it.

10.1 The check had one subject: Ruth's own sign-in

Only one volunteer knew the social media password, and the book never names that person. The fix is individual logins, two-step verification, and recovery details held by the charity manager. Ruth then signs in with her own account and sees two-step verification work. A classmate writes "shared password destroyed" and asks Ruth to store the old password in the note so people can compare. The file shows one successful check. It does not show a destruction, and it does not show every other account. Ruth writes no password and invents no name. The treasurer's row in the access listing is a different fact and is not used to identify the password holder.

10.2 Worked example

Lesson table; scroll horizontally to read all columns →

Synthetic case. No password and no extra account are created.

Errors and limits

Stopping the note from holding a password does not prove the old password is harmless. It keeps the note inside what was checked.

Apply

• EX056 — What did Ruth's sign-in prove? Two-step verification worked on Ruth's own social login. A teammate writes that the shared password is destroyed and asks for it to be copied into the note. What stands, and what do you not write?
  Show marking criteria

  Rubric: 3 = the check is one account; destruction is not in the file; do not write the password; do not name the volunteer;; 2 = one login is not a destroyed password;; 1 = one of those;; 0 = none.