3 ms·

That would matter less if you use the hash as a password as the comment suggests; in that case it matters what the website below in the stack uses.

• Thorrez 7y ago
  I think you misunderstand. I was talking about the case when you use the hash as the password as the comment suggests. >in that case it matters what the website below in the stack uses. I'm not sure exactly what this means. Are you saying you should put your security in the hands of website operators? I don't think you can rely on them. According to HIBP, I've been compromised by 25 breached sites and 28 pastes. I try to design my password scheme such that no matter how bad a site's security is, it has no impact on the security of anything besides that site. DyslexicAtheist's scheme doesn't have that property.
  • zaarn 7y ago
    >Are you saying you should put your security in the hands of website operators? You already do regardless of which password you choose.
    • Thorrez 7y ago
      For that specific website yes. But my security elsewhere shouldn't depend on the security of that website.
      • zaarn 7y ago
        Use a password manager? You can store a hash per website there.
        • Thorrez 7y ago
          It wouldn't be a hash, it would be a randomly generated value. That's what I'm doing. That's not what DyslexicAtheist is doing, and I was pointing out a flaw in DyslexicAtheist's scheme.