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

  • 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
            • Laser@feddit.org
              link
              fedilink
              English
              arrow-up
              1
              ·
              1 year ago

              Salt the hash with something unique to that specific user so identical passwords have different hashes

              Isn’t that… the very definition of a Salt? A user-specific known string? Though my understanding is that the salt gets appended to the user-provided password, hashed and then checked against the record, so I wouldn’t say that the hash is salted, but rather the password.

              Also using a pepper is good practice in addition to a salt, though the latter is more important.

              • frezik@midwest.social
                link
                fedilink
                English
                arrow-up
                0
                ·
                1 year ago

                Some implementers reuse the same salt for all passwords. It’s not the worst thing ever, but it does make it substantially easier to crack than if everything has its own salt.

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

                  That’s a pepper not a salt. A constant value added to the password that’s the same for every user is a pepper and prevents rainbow table attacks. A per-user value added is a salt and prevents a number of things, but the big one is being able to overwrite a users password entry with another known users password (perhaps with a SQL injection).

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

              I remember hearing to not layer encryptions or hashes on top of themselves. It didn’t make any sense to me at the time. It was presented as if that weakened the encryption somehow, though wasn’t elaborated on (it was a security focused class, not encryption focused, so didn’t go heavy into the math).

              Like my thought was, if doing more encryption weakened the encryption that was already there, couldn’t an attacker just do more encryption themselves to reduce entropy?

              The class was overall good, but this was still a university level CS course and I really wish I had pressed on that bit of “advice” more. Best guess at this point is that I misunderstood what was really being said because it just never made any sense at all to me.