If a password reset ability is provided to unauthenticated users (those who have forgotten their passwords can't authenticate) this function can be abused to interfere with legitimate access. Any unauthenticated user can request a password reset for any other user, as long as they know whatever is used to specify the account (typically a login ID or email address).

Thus, any number of invocations of that page would not affect me if I was continuing to already know my password.

Most sites get this wrong. {sigh}

You'd think common password patterns would be already firmly tested and entrenched in every webdevs mind, after, say, a decade and a half of the web? I guess not.

Even better.

Not so good if there is enough information in a single email to allow a successful "login" and takeover of the account but this risk could be mitigated by supporting encryption of the email. It would also be good if the link would no longer work once the password had been changed and after some time (a few days perhaps).

I know this thread is about something far more serious then nitpicking wording, but I still feel it necessary to point out the problem with your statement. Too many people that visit this site don't understand cryptography to know how to properly interpret what you have said.

You have implied that if something is encrypted, that it can't be decrypted ("not be possible"). I think you meant s/encrypted/hashed/ which is a cryptographic hash and is intended not to be reversible. So how could the data be stored in the database encrypted and still allow the passwords to be emailed decrypted in plain text? One way would be to use symmetric encryption such as AES. It uses the same key to encrypt and decrypt which means the key would need to be stored in a safe place. Since the box was rooted, it is unlikely a determined individual would not have been able to eventually find and decrypt the passwords. Asymmetric encryption wouldn't be practical as a means of storing passwords as I understand the PerlMonk's design.

In a nutshell, I agree that the passwords should be hashed which is what I believe you meant by encrypted.

It's not a nitpick to correct a fundamentally flawed statement, particularly in a field where errors and misunderstanding can have such severe consequences. You are correct. My bad. Thanks much.