3 ms·
Rate limiting definitely helps against credential stuffing in the form of trying a bunch of common passwords against random accounts. But there's also "stuffin
by aaronharnly 3y ago
Rate limiting definitely helps against credential stuffing in the form of trying a bunch of common passwords against random accounts.
But there's also "stuffing" with known breached username+password combinations – in which case it still helps, but I don't think as much? In the latter the attack is much more likely to succeed and there's a much smaller number of values being attempted, so the threshold of detection + blocking would have to be much lower...
- themoonisachees 3y agoThe threshold is lower but in reality it still makes considerably more login attempts, many of them failed, than a normal client ever would. Credential stuffing attacks don't really limit themselves to a single account, even if it worked.
- yashap 3y agoYeah, I do think it's worth doing both :) As well as at least making 2FA an option for your users - 2FA is the ultimate defence to most of these problems, but depending on the company/use case, not everyone is willing to make it mandatory, it does tend to be a lot more annoying to users. Things like failed login rate limits, minimum password length/complexity, and banning known breached logins is less intrusive to the user, and still pretty good defence when combined, though not as good as 2FA.