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

  • NotMyOldRedditName@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    1
    ·
    edit-2
    2 months ago

    I think it’s pretty idiotic to

    Verifiers and CSPs SHALL NOT impose other composition rules (e.g., requiring mixtures of different character types) for passwords.

    They might mean well, but the reason we require a special character and number is to ensure the amount of possible characters are increased.

    If a website doesn’t enforce it, people are just going to do a password like password

    password is a totally valid password under this rule. Any 8 letter word is valid. hopsital for example.

    These passwords can be cracked in seconds under 10 minutes, and have their hashes checked for in leaks in no time if the salt is also exposed in the hack.

    Edit: Below

    Numbers from a calculator with 8 characters using sha2 (ignoring that crackers will try obvious fill ins like 0 for o and words before random characters, this is just for example)

    hospital 5m 23s

    Hospital 10m 47s

    Hospita! 39m 12s

    Moving beyond 8

    Hospita!r - 19h 49m

    Hospita!ro 3w 4d

    Hospita!roo 2y 1m

    Hospita!room 66 years

    The suggestion of multiple random words makes not needing the characters but you have to enforce a longer limit then, not 8.

    At least with 11 characters with upper case and special characters if it was all random you get about 2 years after a breach to do something instead of mere weeks. If it was 11 characters all lower case nothing special you’d only get 2 months and we are rarely notified that fast.

    • Lvxferre@mander.xyz
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      3
      ·
      2 months ago

      They might mean well, but the reason we require a special character and number is to ensure the amount of possible characters are increased.

      The problem with this sort of requirement is that most people will solve it the laziest way. In this case, “ah, I can’t use «hospital»? Mkay, «Hospital1» it is! Yay it’s accepted!”. And then there’s zero additional entropy - because the first char still has 26 states, and the additional char has one state.

      Someone could of course “solve” this by inserting even further rules, like “you must have at least one number and one capital letter inside the password”, but then you get users annotating the password in a .txt file because it’s too hard to remember where they capitalised it or did their 1337.

      Instead just skip all those silly rules. If offline attacks are such a concern, increase the min pass length. Using both lengths provided by the guidelines:

      • 8 chars, mixing:minuscules, capitals, digits, and any 20 special chars of your choice, for a total of 82 states per char. 82⁸ = 2*10¹⁵ states per password.
      • 15 chars, using only minuscules, for a total of 26 states per char. Number of states: 26¹⁵ = 1.7*10²¹ states per password.
      • NotMyOldRedditName@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        1
        ·
        edit-2
        2 months ago

        But they mess that up with their 8 char rule

        Verifiers and CSPs SHALL require passwords to be a minimum of eight characters in length and SHOULD require passwords to be a minimum of 15 characters in length.

        I’d they’d just said shall require 15 but not require special chars then that’s okay, but they didn’t.

        Then you end up with the typical shitty manager who sees this, and says they recommend 8 and no special chars, and that’s what it becomes.

        • Lvxferre@mander.xyz
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          1
          ·
          2 months ago

          I don’t think that the entity should be blamed for the shitty manager. Specially given that the document has a full section (appendix A.2) talking about pass length.

          • NotMyOldRedditName@lemmy.world
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            1
            ·
            edit-2
            2 months ago

            The entity knows people will follow what they say for minimums. There’s already someone in the comment section saying they’re now fighting what these lax rules allow.

            Edit: stupid product managers will jump at anything that makes it easier for their users and dropping it to 8, no special characters, and no resets is the new thing now.