←back to thread

430 points tambourine_man | 1 comments | | HN request time: 0.001s | source
Show context
mr_mitm ◴[] No.41879391[source]
I'm glad someone is thinking about UX and ergonomics when it comes to passwords. Most people I interact with have by now realized that generating passwords is a good idea. But if you are already generating the password, please do not include special characters. I regularly use different keyboard layouts (sometimes it is not even clear which layout is active, like in the vSphere web console), and the fact that passwords are often not shown on the screen when typing them makes for terrible UX and causes frustration.

The usual advice about character classes is only for casual users who don't know what makes a secure password. Entropy is the deciding factor: Ten random lower case letters is much more secure than "Summer2024!", which satisfies most password rules and has more characters.

Personally I stick to lower case letters for things like my Netflix password or Wifi key, because typing with a TV remote can be a huge pain. To keep a similar entropy, just increase the length by one or two characters.

replies(10): >>41879469 #>>41879535 #>>41879556 #>>41879734 #>>41879735 #>>41880345 #>>41880499 #>>41881423 #>>41881471 #>>41883418 #
Terretta ◴[] No.41880345[source]
> The usual advice about character classes is only for casual users who don't know what makes a secure password.

Arguably, it was to make early rainbow tables less feasible.

> if you are already generating the password, please do not include special characters.

This would make your generator useless on most sites. Since it's not the generator making up this rule, it's the web site's password "complexity" requirements.

I do agree password strength tests should just measure bits of entropy and allow whatever's typed that's high enough.

replies(5): >>41880400 #>>41880402 #>>41880520 #>>41881041 #>>41885295 #
davedx ◴[] No.41880520[source]
Such sites that do not allow Apple passwords I now skip as a user (unless it’s a government site), it says enough about how you view security and there are plenty of competitors that don’t do this
replies(1): >>41881087 #
beretguy ◴[] No.41881087[source]
What websites are those, I am curious?
replies(1): >>41888410 #
1. jsjohnst ◴[] No.41888410[source]
Not GP, but I had one just the other day that didn’t allow dashes in the password, but did require a special character (of a list of like a dozen, just not including dash). Also, it wasn’t that the dash wasn’t recognized as a special character, but that it wasn’t allowed at all. Wish I could remember what site now.