Comment by ahofmann

6 months ago

I also think it is a good decision. Nevertheless it breaks the workflow of at least one person. My father's Linux password is one character. I didn't knew this when I supported him over screen sharing methods, because I couldn't see it. He told me, so now I know. But the silent prompt protected that fact. It is still a good decision, an one character password is useless from a security standpoint.

If it breaks the workflow of one person but makes it better for many more, it's likely a worthwhile tradeoff.

  • Just add an option to let holding space keep my feet warm. It only needs a few extra lines that won't change.

I may or may not use a single char password on a certain machine. This char may or may not be a single space. It may or may not be used in FDE. It's surprising what (OS installers) this breaks.

> It is still a good decision, an one character password is useless from a security standpoint.

Only if length is known. Which is true now. So it opens the gates to try passwords of specific known length.

  • If you are brute forcing passwords, knowing the length only reduces the number of passwords to try by like 1 hundredth.

    • Drats, you're right. I thought it'd be worse, but the ratio seems to only depend on the number of letters in your character set: 1/count(letters in alphabet).

      For ascii at 95 printable chars you get 0.9894736842. Makes intuitive sense as the "weight" of each digit increases, taking away a digit matters less to the total combos.

      Maybe I'll start using one Japanese Kanji to confuse would be hackers! They could spend hours trying to brute force it while wondering why they can't crack my one letter password they saw in my terminal prompt. ;)

      7 replies →