r/mildlyinfuriating Mar 08 '16

Overdone Fuck it, hackers win.

Post image
14.6k Upvotes

992 comments sorted by

View all comments

Show parent comments

1.6k

u/King_Baboon Mar 08 '16

That's what makes it even more infuriating. This is a government site where I have to take mandatory training.

490

u/[deleted] Mar 08 '16 edited Mar 09 '16

Well there it is. It's a government website. It needs to be secure. Password restrictions have always annoyed me on websites where it's just my shit that going to get fucked. Yes all of these restrictions will make my shit more secure, but if I want my password to be hunter12 then that should be my perogative. But on a government website it makes sense.

Edit: politeness

Edit 2: Jesus fucking Christ I get it. These types of passwords are more susceptible to brute force passwords. I don't need 20 of you motherfuckers to tell me the same damn thing.

809

u/[deleted] Mar 08 '16

Restrictions like OPs make the site less secure because meow a hacker has a set of rules they can use to pre filter their attack list. Many less combinations to try meow.

17

u/Fonethree Mar 08 '16

You'd think so, but the fact is that without these restrictions a high number of people would use passwords that are extremely easy to guess (i.e. abcd1234 or some such). With these restrictions, yes, they give a small amount of additional information to the attacker, but they ultimately increase the security of the average user.

45

u/pulley999 Mar 08 '16

Restrictions are a double edged sword: It stops stupid people from making stupid passwords, but each one makes the whole system orders of magnitude less secure. The no consecutive characters alone eliminates billions, possibly trillions of combinations within a reasonable length. Ideally there are other ways to try to prevent stupid people making stupid passwords than to compromise the whole system for everyone.

Relevant XKCD

10

u/sarge21 Mar 08 '16

each one makes the whole system orders of magnitude less secure. The no consecutive characters alone eliminates billions, possibly trillions of combinations within a reasonable length.

Reducing the password space by billions or trillions is not making it orders of magnitude less secure.

Even if you excluded 999 trillion passwords from all possible 8 character passwords (with caps/noncaps,symbols,numbers) you'd only be excluding 15% of the possible combinations. I don't really have the time to figure it out, but just go to a random password generator and take a look at how many times you'd have to regenerate a password, on average, to hit one of these exclusion policies. It will be extremely rare.

The XKCD is absolutely correct though, because one of the important parts of a password is being able to remember it. A long passphrase with some randomness thrown in will make a password which is impossible to brute force.

18

u/xkcd_transcriber Mar 08 '16

Image

Mobile

Title: Password Strength

Title-text: To anyone who understands information theory and security and is in an infuriating argument with someone who does not (possibly involving mixed case), I sincerely apologize.

Comic Explanation

Stats: This comic has been referenced 2103 times, representing 2.0499% of referenced xkcds.


xkcd.com | xkcd sub | Problems/Bugs? | Statistics | Stop Replying | Delete

7

u/Fonethree Mar 08 '16

It's difficult to calculate what the change would be (it may be more than I'm estimating). Like I said in another post, this particular strategy is sort of half-baked, but still, the logic is sound.

For an example of someone that did do the math on how restrictions effect the time to brute-force a password (which, remember, is almost never the method actually used), see https://www.physicsforums.com/threads/keyspace-of-a-password.230537/#post-1701799

1

u/evoblade Mar 08 '16

"correct horse battery staple" might be overtaking "password" on this list of common passwords.

1

u/[deleted] Mar 08 '16

I use, "we boil maple sugar," or I would if it were not such an easy password to guess according to stupid IT policies.

1

u/rainwulf Mar 09 '16

Holy shit i never thought of that. Having those restrictions make the list of possible passwords so much smaller! Shit.

1

u/Luigimario280 Mar 08 '16

Maybe the average user should be smarter

1

u/[deleted] Mar 08 '16

Maybe we should design policy based upon how the world really is, rather than how we'd like it to be.

1

u/rainwulf Mar 09 '16

Just restrict to length. 16 characters means it wont ever be one word, or if it is, it will be a fairly low frequency word.

0

u/PissdickMcArse Mar 08 '16

Except both of those wouldn't be allowed because of the consecutive letters and numbers thing.

3

u/Fonethree Mar 08 '16 edited Mar 08 '16

without these restrictions