In password security, the longer the better. With a password manager, using more than 24 characters is simple. Unless, of course, the secure password is not accepted due to its length. (In this case, through STOVE.)

Possibly indicating cleartext storage of a limited field (which is an absolute no-go), or suboptimal or lacking security practices.

  • Crashumbc@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    0
    ·
    6 hours ago

    What’s the point? no one is brute forcing a 12-15 password if the login system has ANY login attempt protection anyway.

    This seems like one of the extreme overkill things…

    • JcbAzPx@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      0
      ·
      1 hour ago

      That doesn’t help if someone got a list of their hashes somehow. Then an attacker can use their own system to crack them.

      And that’s if they aren’t just storing the passwords as clear text to begin with, which length limitations are often a sign of.

    • _skj@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      0
      ·
      2 hours ago

      Such a small max length is a good indicator they aren’t handling passwords correctly. A modern website should be able to send and hash kilobytes of text without the user seeing a significant delay. Having a max size like this sounds like they are storing the password as text instead of a hash.

      Or some dumb project manager said passwords longer than 24 characters look bad in the UI and wanted the limit.

    • Kissaki@feddit.orgOP
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      0
      ·
      2 hours ago

      Do you check on login attempt protection behavior before creating accounts, and then choose your password length accordingly - longer or shorter?