• 0 Posts
  • 28 Comments
Joined 4 months ago
cake
Cake day: July 22nd, 2024

help-circle










  • Even in your example above, with only two letters, no numbers / special characters allowed, requiring a capital letter decreases the possibilities back to the original 676 possible passwords - not less.

    No it doesn’t. It reduces the possibilities to less than the 52x52 possibilities that would exist if you allowed all possible combinations of upper and lower case letters.

    You are confused because you only see the two options of enforcing or not allowing certain characters. All characters need to be allowed but none should be enforced. That maximizes the number of possible combinations.

    that passwords should all require certain complexity, but without broadcasting the password requirements publicly?

    No, because that’s still the same. An attacker can find out the rules by creating accounts and testing.


  • By adding uppercase letters (for a total of 52 characters to choose from), you get 52 * 52 = 2704 possible passwords.

    You don’t add them, you enforce at least one. That eliminates all combinations without upper case letters.

    So, without this rule you would indeed have the 52x52 possible passwords, but with it you have (52x52)-(26x26) possible passwords (the second bracket is all combinations of 2 lowercase letters), which is obviously less.

    The only way you would decrease the number of possible passwords is if you specified that the character in a particular spot had to be uppercase

    Wrong. In your example, for any given try, if you have put a lowercase letter in spot 1, you don’t need to try any lowercase in spot 2.

    Any information you give the attacker eliminates possible combinations.








  • the user can simply choose not to read the article, so there’s an option where they don’t get fucked.

    We are rapidly nearing a point where you can’t read online news from any major (ergo “widely considered somewhat credible”) source without one of those schemes. So I’d argue that the alternative is to just not get access to online news, and that may be considered too much pressure to still consider consent as voluntary.