BLU Discuss list archive

[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

[Discuss] Password managers

Subject: [Discuss] Password managers
From: kentborg at borg.org (Kent Borg)
Date: Wed, 6 May 2020 13:05:58 -0400
In-reply-to: <5eb2d4b7.1c69fb81.c9540.9f0b@mx.google.com>
References: <9c4a5c7e-55aa-8ae1-da3b-4512cb2ae85c@gmail.com> <5eb1f81d.1c69fb81.80c8b.07ca@mx.google.com> <CANiupv686GBC5EZVsiEf831-b4i0E3NjZ3fnsDToM02z1zjUNg@mail.gmail.com> <5eb223cd.1c69fb81.6fa04.3ab5@mx.google.com> <0cbc8403-48a5-14bd-524c-a4eded6b64fa@borg.org> <e2be00f8-8de6-4645-e71b-a5d14f78ede7@borg.org> <5eb2d4b7.1c69fb81.c9540.9f0b@mx.google.com>

On 5/6/20 11:16 AM, Rich Pieri wrote:
> On Wed, 6 May 2020 10:09:30 -0400
> Kent Borg <kentborg at borg.org> wrote:
>
>> And for one that is reused...doesn't matter so much. All your uses
>> are as weak as the weakest site to which you have given that password.
> Which is why 16+ random characters never reused.

Except 16+ is overkill for a password. (*Password*, not encryption 
passphrase--the two are extremely different uses.)

-kb

Follow-Ups:
- [Discuss] Password managers
  - From: richard.pieri at gmail.com (Rich Pieri)

References:
- [Discuss] Password managers
  - From: j.natowitz at gmail.com (Jerry Natowitz)
- [Discuss] Password managers
  - From: richard.pieri at gmail.com (Rich Pieri)
- [Discuss] Password managers
  - From: sweetser at alum.mit.edu (Doug)
- [Discuss] Password managers
  - From: richard.pieri at gmail.com (Rich Pieri)
- [Discuss] Password managers
  - From: kentborg at borg.org (Kent Borg)
- [Discuss] Password managers
  - From: kentborg at borg.org (Kent Borg)
- [Discuss] Password managers
  - From: richard.pieri at gmail.com (Rich Pieri)

Prev by Date: [Discuss] Password managers
Next by Date: [Discuss] Password managers
Previous by thread: [Discuss] Password managers
Next by thread: [Discuss] Password managers
Index(es):
- Date
- Thread