this post was submitted on 26 Sep 2024
549 points (99.3% liked)

Technology

59724 readers
3878 users here now

This is a most excellent place for technology news and articles.


Our Rules


  1. Follow the lemmy.world rules.
  2. Only tech related content.
  3. Be excellent to each another!
  4. Mod approved content bots can post up to 10 articles per day.
  5. Threads asking for personal tech support may be deleted.
  6. Politics threads may be removed.
  7. No memes allowed as posts, OK to post as comments.
  8. Only approved bots from the list below, to ask if your bot can be added please contact us.
  9. Check for duplicates before posting, duplicates may be removed

Approved Bots


founded 2 years ago
MODERATORS
 

Here is the text of the NIST sp800-63b Digital Identity Guidelines.

you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[–] escapesamsara@lemmings.world 4 points 2 months ago (1 children)

Then you're vulnerable to simple brute force attacks, which if paired with a dumped hash table, can severely cut the time it takes to solve the hash and reveal all passwords.

[–] cmnybo@discuss.tchncs.de 7 points 2 months ago (2 children)

By any length I meant no maximum length. Obviously you don't want to use a super short password.

[–] MelodiousFunk@slrpnk.net 6 points 2 months ago (1 children)
[–] catloaf@lemm.ee 6 points 2 months ago

Mine is the null string. They'll never guess it!

[–] frezik@midwest.social 4 points 2 months ago (1 children)

Some kind of upper bound is usually sensible. You can open a potential DoS vector by accepting anything. The 72 byte bcrypt/scrypt limit is generally sensible, but going for 255 would be fine. There's very little security to be gained at those lengths.

I do 256 so I hopefully never need to update it, but most of my passwords are 20-30 characters or something, and generated by my password manager. I don't care if you choose to write a poem or enter a ton of unicode, I just need a bunch of bytes to hash.