Communities

Writing
Writing
Codidact Meta
Codidact Meta
The Great Outdoors
The Great Outdoors
Photography & Video
Photography & Video
Scientific Speculation
Scientific Speculation
Cooking
Cooking
Electrical Engineering
Electrical Engineering
Judaism
Judaism
Languages & Linguistics
Languages & Linguistics
Software Development
Software Development
Mathematics
Mathematics
Christianity
Christianity
Code Golf
Code Golf
Music
Music
Physics
Physics
Linux Systems
Linux Systems
Power Users
Power Users
Tabletop RPGs
Tabletop RPGs
Community Proposals
Community Proposals
tag:snake search within a tag
answers:0 unanswered questions
user:xxxx search by author id
score:0.5 posts with 0.5+ score
"snake oil" exact phrase
votes:4 posts with 4+ votes
created:<1w created < 1 week ago
post_type:xxxx type of post
Search help
Notifications
Mark all as read See all your notifications »
Q&A

Welcome to Software Development on Codidact!

Will you help us build our independent community of developers helping developers? We're small and trying to grow. We welcome questions about all aspects of software development, from design to code to QA and more. Got questions? Got answers? Got code you'd like someone to review? Please join us.

Comments on Are "strong passwords" at all meaningful?

Post

Are "strong passwords" at all meaningful?

+18
−0

Whenever registering to diverse sites on the net, you are often forced to enter a so called "strong password", which would ideally contain both upper case letters, lower case letters, digits, and some other character like punctuation. As hard to remember as possible.

What I don't understand from a software development point of view is how these characters would make that much of a difference.

All of it seems to assume that a hacker trying to break a password would utilize so-called brute force. That is: try "A", try "B" ... "try AA" and so on. The more variations, the longer it takes to execute the brute force algorithm.

If I have a password of up to 10 capital letters A to Z plus "empty", that's 27 combinations, for a total of 2710 combinations.

As opposed to having a 10 letter password in the whole UTF8/ASCII 7 bit range, 127 combinations - 32 non-printable + 1 empty = 96, for a total of 9610 combinations.

Sure, a significant difference, astronomical even. But... if they would execute a brute force across TCP/IP they can maybe try one combination every millisecond or something, assuming great bandwidth. Worst case scenario for the 2710 scenario is then 57 days. Some 4 weeks on average. Assuming there's no big latency or packet drop for a significant lower bandwidth, in which case this isn't really feasible at all.

I don't see anyone setting up a brute force operation for that in order to access John Doe's Gmail account or whatever... it is already too much of an obstacle. Unless they hope to get lucky on the initial bunch permutations, which can of course happen.

Assuming that brute force is actually what's used, which sounds quite unlikely to me. Instead of something else entirely: keyword logging, packet sniffing, the human factor ("Hi this is your bank please send us your password") etc etc.

So is the usefulness of this whole "strong password" thing just an urban legend, where companies force us to memorize ridiculously hard to remember passwords for no real gain? Why is the number of symbol table combinations in the password oh so important on almost any Internet site these days?

History
Why does this post require attention from curators or moderators?
You might want to add some details to your flag.
Why should this post be closed?

5 comment threads

Security theater (3 comments)
Relevant XKCD: https://xkcd.com/936/ (3 comments)
See also: SE thread "What is your way to create good passwords that can actually be remembered?" (1 comment)
I think the question becomes more interesting in the context of most popular services (and most workp... (1 comment)
Off-topic (5 comments)
Security theater
Olin Lathrop‭ wrote 12 months ago

I don't have any data either, but I've often thought that these "strong" passwords were less secure than letting me pick something easy. With a difficult password, I have to write it down. If allowed to make something easy to remember, I can write down a short hint that only I would know the meaning of, or not write it down at all.

Another point is that this all should be my call in the first place. I'm willing to put up with some hassle to make my bank login more secure, but for an online Q&A site I'd rather go for convenience. I'm annoyed that GitHub is now forcing two-factor authentication on me. I don't keep anything sensitive there. They shouldn't be imposing their anal security on me.

Lundin‭ wrote 12 months ago

Olin Lathrop‭ Oh don't get me started on two factor authentication... it might just be the dumbest invention of this millennium. Chances of some mysterious hacker taking an interest in my little account at some site: non-existent. Chances of me misplacing/breaking/changing my phone: very high.

I've already managed to lock myself out of MS Office at work... because the two factor bugification app from MS killed all display settings on my phone(!) and Samsung advised me to uninstall the malfunctioning app. Which made the display behave again, but now my MS Office admin rights are lost in cyberspace...

Skipping 3 deleted comments.

Olin Lathrop‭ wrote 5 months ago

thomasfrank‭ But that's the point, it's not "vital". You are forgetting that most passwords, including the less secure ones, are never hacked. Then being "vital" must include the importance of protecting whatever the password is required for. There is no way to know that importance just by looking at the password. You therefore can't say how vital any password strategy is in isolation.

For example, protecting my account on some Q&A site isn't that important because the cost of getting it hacked isn't that high. At worst, someone can impersonate me in the short term before the account is changed and the vandalism undone. Someone getting into my bank account is a different matter, so I'm willing to put up with more inconvenience to get more security.

Is your house made of 20 cm of solid steel with a 5-number combination and time lock on the door? I didn't think so. You wouldn't pay for nor put up with bank vault security on your house or car, but it does make sense for the bank.