full-disclosure - Re: guidelines for good password policy andmaintenance / user centric identity with single passwords (or asmall number at most over time)

lists.openwall.net		lists / announce owl-users owl-dev john-users john-dev passwdqc-users yescrypt popa3d-users / oss-security kernel-hardening musl sabotage tlsify passwords / crypt-dev xvendor / Bugtraq Full-Disclosure linux-kernel linux-netdev linux-ext4 linux-hardening linux-cve-announce PHC
Open Source and information security mailing list archives

Hash Suite: Windows password security audit tool. GUI, reports in PDF.

[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [day] [month] [year] [list]

Message-ID: <44299156.1040404@csuohio.edu>
Date: Tue Mar 28 20:42:14 2006
From: michael.holstein at csuohio.edu (Michael Holstein)
Subject: Re: guidelines for good password
	policy	andmaintenance
	/ user centric identity with single passwords	(or asmall number at most
	over time)

>   Well, but in the example passphrase you chose above (and adding 4 for and 
> 5 for s), there are 20 potentially leet chars.  To specify each one as being 
> either normal or leetified would add 20 bits of entropy.  If you assume the 
> biggest threat against a complex passphrase like that is an advanced 
> dictionary-based attack (combining multiple words and then testing 
> leet-ified and number pre/post-fixed variations), then we just multiplied 
> the cost of bruting it by 2^20.  I reckon that's a worthwhile multiplier!

Most password crackers (notably L0pht) can do "common character 
substituion" tests in conjunction with a wordlist -- thus, 'l33t1fy1ng' 
your passwords is a pretty poor defense.

Michael Holstein CISSP GCIA
Cleveland State University