11/23/2023 0 Comments Characteristics of strong passwords![]() The higher the entropy, the higher the strength, because it becomes more difficult for someone to crack the password, even when using tactics like credential stuffing. When applied to passwords, entropy is a measure of the length of the password and the randomness of the characters within the password. There is a better way to assess password strength that involves using a method known as “entropy.” Entropy is the measure of randomness in an information system. In short, though it’s a rather easy logic for engineers to set up on the backend, the LUDS approach to checking password strength is flawed, frustrating to use, and ineffective. While password managers may help with the last issue, adoption of these tools remains low. Did you choose “Sp0tisagoodboy,” “sPotisag00dboy!,” or Who the heck can keep track!? The system may allow the user to submit a password that contains all of the required characteristics, but also contains common substitutions that are weak – such as From a user perspective, it’s very hard to remember.The system may allow the user to submit a password that contains all of the required characteristics, but still uses a simple pattern that can be easily cracked, such as “A1b2C3d4”. ![]() There are three main flaws in the LUDS approach: Unfortunately, humans are very predictable, and we often end up with insecure passwords that satisfy these conditions but are exceedingly easy for machines to crack. When implementing the LUDS method of password strength estimation, developers may think they are doing the right thing by checking to see if the password contains all of these characteristics. Typically, the legacy approach of password strength estimation follows the LUDS formula (lower case, upper case, digit, symbol). What happens the next time they want a late night pizza after a few beers with friends? Likely a labyrinthine password reset flow, in which they will add different random symbols just to get that midnight pie. Users who are trying to accomplish a simple, non-data-sensitive task, have to randomly insert a couple of exclamation marks or extra letters that they will likely forget as soon as the za arrives at their door. add a special symbol, a digit, etc.).Īs we can see, though, the experience is…bad. As part of this step, the application will inform the user whether their chosen password is insufficient – and if so, it will often provide helpful suggestions on how to fix it (e.g. To avoid this scenario, applications will often require users’ passwords meet certain characteristics to ensure the user sets a sufficiently secure password during account creation. Allowing users to submit low-entropy passwords that can easily be cracked (such as “qwerty” or “abc123”) would expose both the application and user to risk of account takeover. ![]() If you’ve created an account recently, chances are you saw something like what this user saw when trying to order a late night pizza: ![]() LUDS: an ineffective and frustrating legacy Then, we’ll look at two specific tools developers can use today to protect their users, and the basics of how to set them up. In this article, we’ll go over the drawbacks of the de-facto legacy password strength method. Unfortunately, to date these requirements have been poorly designed so that both users and security teams take on unnecessary stress and work. One of the easiest ways to reduce friction and improve user security is through password strength requirements. And while we do hope one day to usher the world into a passwordless future, first and foremost we want to make it easy and safe for our customers to protect their users. īut we recognize that the journey to passwordless can be long and varied. If you’ve heard of Stytch already, you likely know how we feel about passwords.
0 Comments
Leave a Reply. |
AuthorWrite something about yourself. No need to be fancy, just an overview. ArchivesCategories |