3 ms·

"Goofy" cryptographic tokens? Is there a better way?

• tptacek 14y ago
  Not having the tokens be replayable, rewritable to different user IDs, or decryptable would be a good start, right? Yes: the better approach is to have the token be a 256 bit cryptographically strong random number that corresponds to a row in the database with metadata sufficient to expire the token and invalidate it on password reset.
  • ScottBurson 14y ago
    Ah. So it's not the use of cryptographic tokens per se that you're objecting to -- just that they're not generated and/or handled correctly.
    • tptacek 14y ago
      I object in general to the widespread practice of using tokens that contain semantically interesting information protected by encryption.
      • ScottBurson 14y ago
        Got it. Didn't realize that was so widespread.
        • ontoillogical 14y ago
          You'd be surprised to know how often it's just the username encoded in base64...