In password security, the longer the better. With a password manager, using more than 24 characters is simple. Unless, of course, the secure password is not accepted due to its length. (In this case, through STOVE.)

Possibly indicating cleartext storage of a limited field (which is an absolute no-go), or suboptimal or lacking security practices.

  • Possibly linux@lemmy.zip
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    3
    arrow-down
    16
    ·
    edit-2
    33 minutes ago

    There is little point of having a long password. Online accounts don’t have the same issues as encryption

    Edit: for those curious, here is my source https://cybersecuritynews.com/nist-rules-password-security/

    My rationale is that online accounts typically don’t get brute forced due to rate limiting and not protection. The NIST guidelines don’t specify requirements for online accounts specifically but it does recommend a password of 16 characters in general. I don’t really see any need to go above that as you are just making it harder on yourself.

    • expr@programming.dev
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      8
      ·
      6 hours ago

      That’s simply false. Increased length increases the entropy of a password, making it harder to brute force to gain access.

      You have to go out of your way to restrict the length of passwords. There’s absolutely no reason to do it, and it is contrary to all good security practices.

      • Possibly linux@lemmy.zip
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        1
        arrow-down
        3
        ·
        4 hours ago

        I’m not sure how you expect someone to brute force a web service. It is possible but it would be equivalent to a denial of service. Having long passwords for a online login makes no sense. A randomly generated 12 character password isn’t any more or less secure than a 40 character password since they both take a unrealistic amount of time to brute force.

        A 12 character password made up of standard characters would take 475,920,314,814,253,376,475,136 tries assuming you know the length. I don’t see how someone could brute force a web service.

        I will say I get annoyed at web services that require special characters since I like to use 3 words from the EFF extended word list.

      • Possibly linux@lemmy.zip
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        1
        arrow-down
        3
        ·
        4 hours ago

        How old are you?

        The old security wisdom has been thrown out in favor of better practices. If you spend to much time focusing on one spot you will make everyone hate you while leaving gapping holes in your security.

    • CaptainBasculin@lemmy.bascul.in
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      5
      ·
      edit-2
      6 hours ago

      Think of it from a random guess perspective. Guessing a number randomly generated between 0-16 is easier than guessing one between 0-8.

      Now think that all passwords are stored in certain amount of bits, so let’s compare 4 and 8 bits.

      Each bit has a chance to be either 0 or 1, so guessing a single bit’s possibility is 1/2.

      Guessing the correct orientation of 4 different bits takes 1/24 = 1/16

      Guessing the correct orientation of 8 different bits takes 1/28 = 1/256

      Now think passwords being stored in more bits(=longer password)

      • Possibly linux@lemmy.zip
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        1
        arrow-down
        3
        ·
        5 hours ago

        At a certain point it doesn’t matter as the password is effectively unguessable.

        One weakness with longer passwords is that if they are created by humans chances are it will be easier to guess the pattern. This is true for all human created passwords but I think the longer ones are worse since there is more space to create a easily guessable pattern.

    • irelephant [he/him]🍭@lemm.ee
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      2
      ·
      5 hours ago

      Assuming a breach, and hashes are released, its significantly harder to bruteforce a long password.

      Some (a lot) poorly set up websites may not even have a limit on password attempts, or cooldowns.

      • Possibly linux@lemmy.zip
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        1
        arrow-down
        3
        ·
        5 hours ago

        It won’t matter if you use a password manager. You shouldn’t rely on the website to keep your password safe. They could be storing it in plain text for all you know. (It has happened before)

      • Possibly linux@lemmy.zip
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        1
        arrow-down
        2
        ·
        edit-2
        4 hours ago

        As long as the adversary doesn’t have the ability to brute force the password locally, you have the ability to reset in the event of a leaked hash and you aren’t reusing passwords you are fine with a shorter password. Obviously be mindful of easily guessable passwords or ones that are very short. However, a 12 digit sufficiently random password is fine. Don’t fall into the trap of longer but easier to guess.

        Don’t do things like impossiblebatman1. Something like SalariedOverhand22 or imposiba1ttman

        The first secure one I used diceware to generate two random words and then a random number generator to add a number. The second one I randomly changed spelling and the pattern to increase entropy.