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

  • Lvxferre [he/him]@mander.xyz
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    63
    ·
    1 year ago

    Reworded rules for clarity:

    1. Min required length must be 8 chars (obligatory), but it should be 15 chars (recommended).
    2. Max length should allow at least 64 chars.
    3. You should accept all ASCII plus space.
    4. You should accept Unicode; if doing so, you must count each code as one char.
    5. Don’t demand composition rules (e.g. “u’re password requires a comma! lol lmao haha” tier idiocy)
    6. Don’t bug users to change passwords periodically. Only do it if there’s evidence of compromise.
    7. Don’t store password hints that others can guess.
    8. Don’t prompt the user to use knowledge-based authentication.
    9. Don’t truncate passwords for verification.

    I was expecting idiotic rules screaming “bureaucratic muppets don’t know what they’re legislating on”, but instead what I’m seeing is surprisingly sane and sensible.

    • frezik@midwest.social
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      18
      arrow-down
      1
      ·
      1 year ago

      NIST generally knows what they’re doing. Want to overwrite a hard drive securely? NIST 800-88 has you covered. Need a competition for a new block cipher? NIST ran that and AES came out of it. Same for a new hash with SHA3.

    • catloaf@lemm.ee
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      7
      ·
      1 year ago

      I hate that anyone has to be told not to truncate passwords. Like even if you haven’t had any training at all, you’d have to be advanced stupid to even come up with that idea in the first place.

      • Amanduh@lemm.eeBanned from community
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        3
        ·
        1 year ago

        Can you elaborate further? Why would someone want to truncate passwords to begin with?

        • essteeyou@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          5
          ·
          1 year ago

          To save a few megabytes of text in a database somewhere. Likely the same database that gets hacked.

          • orclev@lemmy.world
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            4
            ·
            1 year ago

            Which shouldn’t even matter because passwords are salted and hashed before storing them, so you’re not actually saving anything. At least they better be. If you’re not hashing passwords you’ve got a much bigger problem than low complexity passwords.

            • essteeyou@lemmy.world
              link
              fedilink
              English
              arrow-up
              6
              ·
              1 year ago

              The place that truncates passwords is probably not the place to look for best practices when it comes to security. :-)

              • orclev@lemmy.world
                link
                fedilink
                English
                arrow-up
                0
                ·
                1 year ago

                Hashing passwords isn’t even best practice at this point, it’s the minimally acceptable standard.

                  • pivot_root@lemmy.world
                    link
                    fedilink
                    English
                    arrow-up
                    2
                    ·
                    1 year ago

                    Use a library. It’s far too easy for developers or project managers to fuck up the minimum requirements for safely storing passwords.

                    But, if you are wanting to do it by hand…

                    • Don’t use a regular hashing algorithm, use a password hashing algorithm
                    • Use a high iteration count to make it too resource-intensive to brute force
                    • Salt the hash to prevent rainbow tables
                    • Salt the hash with something unique to that specific user so identical passwords have different hashes
      • einlander@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        2
        ·
        1 year ago

        Microsoft used to do that. I made a password in the late 90’s for a we service and I found out that it truncated my password when they made it after it warned my my password was too long when I tried to log in. It truncated at 16 characters.

        • catloaf@lemm.ee
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          1
          ·
          1 year ago

          The weirdest one I found was a site that would only check to see if what you entered started with the correct password. So if your password was hunter2 and you tried hunter246, it would let you in.

          Which means not only were they storing the password, but they had to go out of their way to use the wrong kind of string comparison.

    • MajorHavoc@programming.dev
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      4
      ·
      1 year ago
      1. Don’t truncate passwords for verification.

      It needed to be said. Because some password system architects have been just that stupid.

      Edit: Fear of other’s stupidity is the mind killer. I will face my fear. My fear will wash over me, and when it has passed, only I will remain. Or I’ll be dead in a car accident caused by an AI driver.

      • Dhs92@programming.dev
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        15
        ·
        1 year ago

        I’ve seen sites truncate when setting, but not on checking. So you set a password on a site with no stated limit, go to use said password, and get locked out. It’s infuriating

        • Ashelyn@lemmy.blahaj.zone
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          3
          ·
          1 year ago

          Years back, I had that happen on PayPal of all websites. Their account creation and reset pages silently and automatically truncated my password to 16 chars or something before hashing, but the actual login page didn’t, so the password didn’t work at all unless I backspaced it to the character limit. I forgot how I even found that out but it was a very frustrating few hours.

      • Buddahriffic@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        2
        ·
        1 year ago

        Yeah, I think 7 and 8 both cover that. I recently signed up for an account where all of the “security questions” provided asked about things that could be either looked up or reasonably guessed based on looked up information.

        We live in a tech world designed for the technically illiterate.

        • eronth@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          0
          ·
          1 year ago

          I usually invent answers to those and store those answers in a password manager. Essentially turns them into backup passwords that can be spoken over the phone if necessary.

          Where was I born? “Stallheim, EUSA, Mars”

          Name of first pet? “Groovy Tuesday”

          It’s fun, usually.

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

      Don’t bug users to change passwords periodically. Only do it if there’s evidence of compromise.

      This is a big one. Especially in corporate environments where most of the users are, shall we say, not tech savvy. Forcing people to comply with byzantine incomprehensible password composition rules plus incessantly insisting that they change their password every 7/14/30 days to a new inscrutable string that looks like somebody sneezed in punctuation marks accomplishes nothing other than enticing everyone to just write their password down on a Post-It and stick it to their monitor or under their keyboard.

      Remember: Users do not care about passwords. From the perspective of anyone who isn’t a programmer or a security expert, passwords are just yet another exasperating roadblock some nerd keeps putting in front of them that is preventing them from doing whatever it is they were actually trying to do.

      • Starbuncle@lemmy.ca
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        2
        ·
        1 year ago

        Everyone I’ve spoken to who has a password change rule just changes one character from their previous password. It does NOTHING.

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

          That works great until some dickhole implements the old, “New password cannot contain any sequence from your previous (5) passwords.”

          This also of course necessitates storing (multiple successive!) passwords in plain text or with a reversible cipher, which is another stupid move. You’d think we’d have gotten all of this out of our collective system as a society by now, and yet I still see it all the time.

          All of these schemes are just security theater, and actively make the system in question less secure while accomplishing nothing other than berating and frustrating its users.

          • Starbuncle@lemmy.ca
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            0
            ·
            1 year ago

            HA, I hope you’re joking. Surely nobody’s actually done that, right? …Riiiight?

    • Tanoh@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      1
      ·
      1 year ago

      Only issue I see is that the 8 chars required is very short and easy to brute force. You would hope that people would go for the recommended instead, but doubt it.

    • hamsterkill@lemmy.sdf.org
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      0
      ·
      1 year ago

      I was expecting idiotic rules screaming “bureaucratic muppets don’t know what they’re legislating on”, but instead what I’m seeing is surprisingly sane and sensible

      NIST knows what they’re doing. It’s getting organizations to adapt that’s hard. NIST has recommended against expiring passwords for like a decade already, for example, yet pretty much every IT dept still has passwords expiring at least once a year.

    • cybersandwich@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      0
      ·
      1 year ago

      I think if you do allow 8 character passwords the only stipulation is that you check it against known compromised password lists. Again, pretty reasonable.

      • naticus@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        10
        ·
        1 year ago

        Very common for pass phrases, and not dissuaded. Pass phrases are good for people to remember without using poor storage practices (post it notes, txt file, etc) and are strong enough to keep secure against brute force attacks or just guessing based off knowledge of the user.

        • grue@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          3
          ·
          1 year ago

          On one hand, that’s true. On the other hand, a person should only need exactly one passphrase, which is the one used to unlock their password manager. Every other password should be randomly-generated and would only contain space characters by chance.

          • naticus@lemmy.world
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            3
            ·
            1 year ago

            That’s great in theory, but you’ll have passwords for logging into OSes too which password managers do not help with and you better have it memorized or you’re going to have a bad time.

      • rebelsimile@sh.itjust.works
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        1
        ·
        1 year ago

        gosh who would want an uncommon character that obviously most average people aren’t thinking about in their passwords, that sounds like it might even be somewhat secure.

      • portifornia@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        0
        ·
        1 year ago

        I’m with you, despite seeing lemmings downvote the heck out of your comment 😢

        The reason, and specifically for whitespace at the beginning or end of a password, is that a lot of users copy-paste their passwords into the form, and for various reasons, whitespace can get pasted in, causing an invalid match. No bueno.

        Source: I’m a web developer who has seen this enough times that we had to implement a whitespace-trim validation for both setting & entering passwords.