Issue in ITShop: "Not yet implemented -> [Hash function for key"

Are you having an empty password set via SQL, maybe at the DialogUser that is used for the user self service (create a new user) part of the Web Portal?

Came across that note to not use direct SQL access. Updated all passwords for assurance via Manager/Designer. Still no effect.

Are you able to log in to the Manager using the same authentication mechanism and user that fails in the web?

I just reproduced this issue, I updated the dialoguserpassword to test, then attempted to login to the web portal using Employee auth and I got the same error message. I then went into Manager, looked up the employee and clicked on the miscellaneous tab and updated the system user password (dialoguserpassword). Once I did that I was able to login. I think that you are updating the central password which is not used for Employee auth, if you only update the central password you will still get the error.

Some more details after some testing:

- Using AD User  (Manual/Role-based) works well.

- Using Employee role-based or similar leads to the error "[999999] Not yet implemented -> [Hash function for key xyz", despite selecting different system users and setting the appropriate password in central password and dialoguserpassword, regardless if ITShop or fat client (Manager, Object Browser etc.) is to be used.

Further hints?

Which operating system are you running this on? Which .NET Framework version?

Did you mark the column Person.DialogUserPassword as to be encrypted in the Designer? You shouldn't do  - that if this is even possible in your version (I can't remember, but I think there was such an issue at some point in time). Thing is, that these values are hashed and not encrypted.

Which operating system are you running this on? Which .NET Framework version?

Did you mark the column Person.DialogUserPassword as to be encrypted in the Designer? You shouldn't do  - that if this is even possible in your version (I can't remember, but I think there was such an issue at some point in time). Thing is, that these values are hashed and not encrypted.

it was a generation rule on dialoguserpassword, ignoring the possibilities via configparms, which led to a malformed hash value of the password.