• squid_slime@lemm.ee
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    5
    ·
    edit-2
    5 hours ago

    I hate these arbitrary limitations of 16 characters, 25 is unbreakable and some sites won’t allow longer than 16 20, I’ve even had one site not allow over 6.

  • cley_faye@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    16
    arrow-down
    1
    ·
    edit-2
    1 day ago

    64 characters picked at random in [a-zA-Z0-9_] is perfectly fine if password is your only option. Special character do not increase significantly the difficulty of bruteforcing it, but introduce the risk of having to manually type "}à.å÷Â!!ç-×ô@¸Á¢±ãÕß>>úÓ}¼º¤«<_`àÅû§Æ]*ÂñçÌÿ§à®&ܱ=Ú-´ð¹é$.>=;Ö if something goes catastrophically wrong.

    • 🦄🦄🦄@feddit.org
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      13
      ·
      24 hours ago

      Not being allowed to use special characters can be a sign of the website saving your password in plain text.

  • Rhynoplaz@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    176
    arrow-down
    1
    ·
    2 days ago

    “Your selected password is already being used by SwiftyFan05. Please choose another password.”

  • m_f@midwest.social
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    106
    arrow-down
    1
    ·
    2 days ago

    Somebody isn’t sanitizing their inputs properly. Like putting a bandaid on a heart attack

    • friend_of_satan@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      5
      ·
      1 day ago

      Which is ridiculous because it’s going to hash down to the same character set. There’s no way they’re storing your password with special characters unhashed, right?

    • Scrubbles@poptalk.scrubbles.tech
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      69
      arrow-down
      1
      ·
      2 days ago

      Whenever I see something like this I just laugh because you’re exactly right. Something isn’t being handled properly and their dev team just proved they don’t know how to do some basic handling. Every API library in JS and restful API I know of handle special characters. If they wanted they could base64 encode it over the wire. Then you’re exactly right, if the database “can’t handle it” more than likely it’s a home spun database connection where they’re serializing it themselves (which even then this is solvable), but even then that proves that they make poor choices.

      • OmegaLemmy@discuss.online
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        9
        ·
        1 day ago

        Sometimes I wonder if I’m even fit for employment as a developer and then I see shit like this where I wonder who and what happened for this to even become an option?

      • doeknius_gloek@discuss.tchncs.de
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        31
        ·
        edit-2
        2 days ago

        if the database “can’t handle it” […] that proves that they make poor choices.

        Exactly, the database should never even have to handle the password in it’s original form and hashing algorithms don’t care about special characters.

      • Snot Flickerman@lemmy.blahaj.zone
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        12
        ·
        edit-2
        2 days ago

        This is like when I was in my twenties working at a crappy grocery store with a MoneyGram inside of it. I live in Washington state, and at the time, if your last name was less than five characters, you would have asterisk’s in your license number. The MoneyGram system wanted people’s license numbers but was unable to recognize a license with an asterisk. It happened pretty rarely, but it always happened to people whose last names were four characters or less long. Five letters in your last name and you were gold. To make the transactions happen, I would just do the whole license number minus the asterisk.

        Anyway, Washington changed how it generates license numbers so its a moot point anyway but I don’t think MoneyGram ever spent a dime to fix this since it only affected a small number of people in one US state.

        • bitchkat@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          1
          ·
          2 days ago

          Are you saying that your driver’s license number contains your name? Do you get a new number if you change your name?

          • tigeruppercut@lemmy.zip
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            2
            ·
            1 day ago

            Some states base it on your name in some ways. Mine used to have (maybe still do but I don’t live there anymore) letters from first and last names plus birth date as most of the number. I assume if you change your name your number changes as well.

      • dual_sport_dork 🐧🗡️@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        8
        ·
        2 days ago

        Seems to be they’re dropping the passwords in the database in plain text, but they’re deathly afraid that someone will drop a '; in there or something and the insert will break.

        Notwithstanding that storing passwords in plain text is a slapping with the 10 foot rubber chicken, but mysqli_real_escape_string() or any number of other similar solutions are indeed a thing that exists. A prepared statement would work, too.

        • Aganim@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          4
          ·
          2 days ago

          but mysqli_real_escape_string() or any number of other similar solutions are indeed a thing that exists. A prepared statement would work, too.

          You make it sound as if a prepared statement is a last resort. I would turn that around: as a rule always use prepared statements when dealing with user input. It’s very easy to forget a single call to mysqli_real_escape_string().

          • dual_sport_dork 🐧🗡️@lemmy.world
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            1
            ·
            edit-2
            1 day ago

            I was thinking more along the lines of the types of laziness/ineptitude most likely present at wherever OP’s example were being written. Escape string is one line of code for this whereas preparing a statement is like five.

            But really they should just be hashing it. Then the input doesn’t matter.

    • Th4tGuyII@fedia.io
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      2
      ·
      2 days ago

      Was my first thought. The only reason special characters would ever matter in a password is if you’re storing/processing them improperly

    • groet@feddit.org
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      32
      ·
      2 days ago

      Might be a minimum of 16 chars. Or the parsing is broken and treats the ’ as the end of the password

      • teletext@reddthat.com
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        5
        ·
        2 days ago

        Yeah, I’d consider anything less than 20 characters broken. Much too likely that it’s contained in a rainbow table, regardless how many special characters you use. Can I remember many 20 character passwords? No, but my password manager can.

        • CanadaPlus@lemmy.sdf.org
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          5
          ·
          edit-2
          1 day ago

          That’s a big rainbow table. Like, with just precomputed values and random ascii character passwords it’s on the order of 1042 entries. You can shave that down a bit probably with all the tricks rainbow tables use, but I think you’re safe.

          • teletext@reddthat.com
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            1
            ·
            edit-2
            1 day ago

            Base85 contains just about every printable ASCII character, so I’ll use that as a base. 8516 ~= 1031 -> extremely huge, but still feasible at least for state actors. 8520 ~= 1039 -> if I read Wolfram Alpha’s comparison correctly, that is more information than is believed to be contained in the DNA of all living creatures combined. That’s why I’d recommend >= 20 characters.

            • frezik@midwest.social
              link
              fedilink
              English
              arrow-up
              3
              ·
              1 day ago

              State actors don’t generally need to break passwords. They ask the company “nicely” and they get what they want. The exception would be if that password is being used to encrypt data.

            • CanadaPlus@lemmy.sdf.org
              link
              fedilink
              English
              arrow-up
              1
              ·
              edit-2
              1 day ago

              1031 is ridiculously huge too. The NSA probably works on EB scales, which is “only” 1018 bytes. If you can get up to 1022 equally likely passwords you’re fine against dragnet, brute force-style attacks. (If you’re zombie Bin Laden and the NSA will stop for a whole year cracking your drive, and doesn’t have any shortcuts, maybe you need 1039 I guess)

              That being said, if more characters is no problem, go ahead and do that. I’m not saying more security for free is a bad thing.

        • Aganim@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          5
          ·
          edit-2
          2 days ago

          I let my password manager create 32 char passwords, that should be enough for a while. But of course then you have websites that throw you a ‘your password is too long’ message and have you find out by trial and error that they only accept 12 characters.

          Or the off-by-one errors where they insist that 24 chars are the max, but in reality they accept 23. Probably never tested the limit.

          Or websites that truncate your password after X characters when registering, but not when logging in, so you end up with an incorrect password and good luck finding out which limit the registration page actually uses.

    • stevedice
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      9
      ·
      2 days ago

      My previous bank forced 8 characters with only numbers and letters.

      • SanctimoniousApe@lemmings.world
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        46
        ·
        2 days ago

        They’ll accept it, but won’t tell you they ignored everything after character n, and their login page won’t take anything but the “correct” password so you’ll be spending some time figuring out the actual character count limit…

      • frezik@midwest.social
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        1
        ·
        1 day ago

        Bcrypt/Scrypt have a 72 byte limit. Developers can get around that by putting it through a regular hash first, but that’s not common.

    • Whats_your_reasoning@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      3
      ·
      1 day ago

      Some months back, there was a thread here on Lemmy where people were discussing western names written using Chinese characters. Phonetically, the names will sound alike. But meaning-wise, the characters will result in a Correct Horse Battery Staple-esque string of words.

      Which is why I have since decided to make passwords by typing random names into a Chinese name generator and using the English translated result.

      Sounds like a lot of work, but the way I see it, trying to think of new passwords is always work so I might as well have fun with it.

  • Buffalox@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    13
    ·
    edit-2
    2 days ago

    It’s actually nice they have underscore. 😀
    Yes because if you choose 8 characters at random, with 25 small + 25 big letters and 10 numeric, it* only 60^8 = 167,961,600,000,000 combinations.
    I think the problem is more if the system allows brute force with thousands of erroneous attempts.
    Then statistically any hacker can attempt several accounts, and ultimately get lucky. But by all means, put the responsibility to the user, users are the experts right!?
    I never got the frantic excessive entropy mindset, when the problem is much simpler to not allow crackers endless attempts. You can allow 50 attempts, and chances would be very slim to guess even pretty moronic passwords.

    What’s even worse is when they REQUIRE big and small and numbers to maximize entropy, they actually make statistically FEWER attempts necessary to brute force it.
    A standard Microsoft introduced in the 90’s, and FUCKING almost everybody is using, despite it’s a 100% moronic requirement.
    Instead just warn against passwords that can be guessed by logic, or can be found in a dictionary.

    • stevedice
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      12
      ·
      2 days ago

      Most websites don’t allow multiple failed logins and, even if they did, the network latency alone would make brute force attacks useless. The point of having a high entropy password is to protect against hackers brute forcing a leaked database of hashes. Having different passwords for every website also protects against this so, as usual, the answer is “just use a password manager”.

      • purplemonkeymad@programming.dev
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        3
        ·
        2 days ago

        The point of having a high entropy password is to protect against hackers brute forcing a leaked database of hashes.

        I don’t think you need to worry about that in this case, the special character restriction suggests to me that they don’t hash it.

      • Buffalox@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        1
        arrow-down
        4
        ·
        2 days ago

        The point of having a high entropy password is to protect against hackers brute forcing a leaked database of hashes.

        Seems a bit stupid if a database of passwords or other sensitive information can be brute forced.

        • stevedice
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          7
          arrow-down
          1
          ·
          2 days ago

          Please clarify what you mean because your comment is giving me these vibes.

          1000014915

      • Buffalox@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        1
        arrow-down
        4
        ·
        2 days ago

        just use a password manager

        I will never do that, I have a system instead. I never understood why people would want to use a password manager. To me it seems it ads an attack vector, where you could lose EVERYTHING!

        • frezik@midwest.social
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          1
          ·
          1 day ago

          Passwords suck as an authentication system in general. Your own system is probably worse than what password managers do. Yes, there are problems, but so does every other solution to this, and password managers win out in the comparison.

          • Buffalox@lemmy.world
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            1
            arrow-down
            1
            ·
            1 day ago

            Your own system is probably worse than what password managers do.

            How so? If you use a password manager across 3 platforms, that makes for 3 attack vectors.
            My personal system has guaranteed no vulnerabilities. So how do you conclude my system is worse?

            • frezik@midwest.social
              link
              fedilink
              English
              arrow-up
              1
              arrow-down
              1
              ·
              1 day ago

              My personal system has guaranteed no vulnerabilities

              If you think that’s true, then you don’t have the experience to make a secure system.

              • Buffalox@lemmy.world
                link
                fedilink
                English
                arrow-up
                1
                arrow-down
                1
                ·
                24 hours ago

                What? What kind of system do you think I have? The only vulnerability is if they can hack my brain.

                • frezik@midwest.social
                  link
                  fedilink
                  English
                  arrow-up
                  1
                  arrow-down
                  1
                  ·
                  20 hours ago

                  Yeah, that’s going to be a terrible system. The human brain isn’t capable of keeping track of enough entropy to create a secure password system.

                  More generally, it’s a big red flag when anybody thinks they can make a better system than publicly available and verified systems. You’re not capable of that, I’m not capable of that, Bruce Schneier is not capable of that. No matter how smart you are, you missed something. That’s why I didn’t need to know a single detail.

        • stevedice
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          6
          ·
          2 days ago

          I guarantee your system is less secure than the worst password manager. Humans are inherently bad at choosing passwords, or anything to do with randomness really.

  • ted
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    8
    ·
    2 days ago

    Try this one, has lots of special characters: a_a_a_a_a_a_a_a

      • TriflingToad
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        1
        ·
        1 day ago

        or the entirety of the Bible with special characters removed and spaces replaced with underscores

  • expatriado@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    7
    ·
    2 days ago

    recently did one that only cared about being very long, so i typed thispasswordisfuckinglong and it took it