• mitchty@lemmy.sdf.org
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        3
        ·
        1 month ago

        Depends, if you treat the individual letters sure but if you look at the words as the atom of information most password crackers wouldn’t take long.

        • pez@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          7
          ·
          1 month ago

          There are ~100 symbols on the US keyboard, many not permitted in a lot of online passwords (stupidly).

          There are 11 words in the “passphrase”. Fight, letter, open, urge, weapon are not in the 100 most common English words. Urge is not in the 1000 most common English words (let alone fights vs fight, or opener vs open).

          I think it would be a fairly strong password. You can reduce the entropy a bit by predicting likely next words in a sequence, but that would be defeated by adding some non sequitur(s). “fights the urge to use a letter opener as a scooter” or something.

          Capitalization, intentional typos, spaces or not, ending punctuation? There a for sure ways to improve it as a password while still keeping the easy to remember, easy to type aspect. Overall it’s a great strategy to teach people for making passwords.

          • mitchty@lemmy.sdf.org
            link
            fedilink
            arrow-up
            2
            arrow-down
            1
            ·
            1 month ago

            Sure just if fully given in this way it’s basically the same as an 11 character password. And more damning is it’s not really random. I’d use this as a case of more education on longer passphrases aren’t always longer entropy on their own if they are non random phrases is all. And there’s a lot of different word lists out there. I’d give this a go on my system and see if a guided run with the knowledge of how things were built can brute force it.

            The big thing is a secure passphrase or password should be resistant to attacks even if there is perfect knowledge of how it was generated. In this case all lower case English words in a non random phrase works against that.

            • RecluseRamble@lemmy.dbzer0.com
              link
              fedilink
              arrow-up
              2
              ·
              edit-2
              1 month ago

              Sure just if fully given in this way it’s basically the same as an 11 character password.

              Only of the attacker knows whether it’s a password or phrase. I’d argue that passwords are far more common and that’s what a cracker would focus on first.

              should be resistant to attacks even if there is perfect knowledge of how it was generated

              As far as I know there still is no way to create actual randomness. You’ll still have some pseudo-random number generator and a hopefully unguessable seed. If you have “perfect knowledge” about that, cracking the password is almost trivial.

              • Gremour@lemmy.world
                link
                fedilink
                arrow-up
                2
                ·
                1 month ago

                Morden computers have hardware that generates entropy. It is used for cryptography.

                Also, when creating password for yourself, you can use a simple physical dice, it’s truly random.

    • LifeInMultipleChoice@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      4
      ·
      edit-2
      1 month ago

      Those do make good passwords though. Had a company switch from 10 characters including special, caps, numbers lower upper requirements to 15+ with no requirements because it still would end up being harder to crack. Started using phrases where you could even put spaces, but in all lower case for me if was much quicker to type

      Tangerine$45 is much harder for me to type than whatthefuckamidoinghere

      I think it’s because I have to pause to think shift 4, then hit 4 and remember if my fingers are still by the 4.

      All just examples but the standard keys… Are all automatic for me because of use.