4 ms·
This is where diceware comes in. You are supposed to pick whatever word you roll on the first try, no exceptions, for this very reason. Rolling until you get a
by nommm-nommm 10y ago
This is where diceware comes in. You are supposed to pick whatever word you roll on the first try, no exceptions, for this very reason. Rolling until you get a word you "like" reduces randomnesss significantly. They even say you should use only use real, meatspace dice to generate passwords to be truly random, not pseudorandom.
http://world.std.com/~reinhold/dicewarefaq.html http://world.std.com/~reinhold/dicewarefaq.html
>There are some obscure words in both lists. If you passphrase includes a word you don't know, look it up in a good dictionary. Learning the word's meaning will aid you memory and your vocabulary.
Of course there's exceptions when you should start from scratch.
http://world.std.com/~reinhold/diceware.html http://world.std.com/~reinhold/diceware.html
>Because some words on the diceware list are two characters or less, you can get a very short passphrase. If your passphrase, including the spaces between the words, is less than 17 characters long, we recommend that you start over and create a new passphrase. You should also start over if your passphrase is a recognizable English sentence or phrase. (These situations are extremely rare.)
(If it were me I'd just keep adding more and more words if my password was 17 chars or less)
- ams6110 10y agoWhen I use diceware I use random.org for the dice rolls. They claim true randomness generated from atmospheric noise.
- leni536 10y agoGetting your entropy for crypto purposes from a 3rd party is not a great idea.
- Fnoord 10y ago'3rd party' is rather vague in this context. At least to me it is. Perhaps its more clarifying to say the usage of any networking required is out of the question. E.g. you should be able to use a diceware application on a laptop which is completely off the grid.
- DanBC 10y agoIs that because Random.org is really random, or because your threat model doesn't include state level actors taking over random.org?
- taneq 10y agoIf state level actors really are interested in what you have to say, then either you're a high enough level spook that you aren't using a web service for your entropy source, or your crypto is not going to be the weak point in your defense.
- deleted 10y ago[deleted]
- Cpoll 10y agoIf every hacker uses random.org, it's more cost-effective to compromise the service than to take a wrench to every single hacker's kneecaps. It wouldn't be a targeted attack, but it might be very useful if a sufficient subset of 'interesting' people use random.org.
- ams6110 10y agoBecause I don't often have physical dice handy. So it's that or pseudorandom numbers I generate on my local machine.
- sevenfive 10y ago> Rolling until you get a word you "like" reduces randomnesss significantly. Rerolling 32 times loses 5 bits of security... not a big deal.
- rocqua 10y agoA 5 word diceware password has ~50 bits of security. 5 bits is a significant part of 50 bits. Alternatively, it matters whether an attack takes a month or 2.67 years.
- unscaled 10y agoPseudorandom bits are statistically indistinguishable from random bits if seeded with true randomness. And if your OS is properly configured it should be seeded with true randomness. If you prefer to use a dice, that's fine, but you're going to bet less than two bits of entropy per roll. Enjoy rolling your dice more than 70 times to get 128 bits of entropy. ;)
- nommm-nommm 10y agoYou don't roll them one by one.
- unscaled 10y agoDo you roll 10 of them in one hand and manually input the results back? For what purpose?