The worst part of this is that a lot of their advice for stronger passwords is idiotic and dangerous. They've taken methods that do increase entropy, but castra

The worst part of this is that a lot of their advice for stronger passwords is idiotic and dangerous. They've taken methods that do increase entropy, but castrated them by making them systematic and predictable. 1. Using a multi-word passphrase is smart, but only if you generate it randomly. A novice reading their suggestion might think they can come up with a phrase that's meaningful to them. This is very bad advice and will lead to weak pass phrases, guaranteed. 2. The choice to delimit the words in your pass phrase with spaces/hyphens/title-case adds less than 2 bits of entropy to your password. If you do it the same way that everyone else does it (because Intel told you to), it adds zero bits. Randomly mixing in capitalization increases entropy. Predictably mixing in capitalization does not. 3. Adding numbers to your password is a red herring. The most likely effect that advice will have on a user is to encourage them to choose a pass phrase where a number fits in naturally, which will drastically reduce entropy since it constrains the types of phrases they might choose from. And again, randomly throwing in numbers increases entropy. Predictably throwing them in does not. 4. Adding an exclamation, period, or question mark to then end of your pass phrase adds, again, less than 2 bits of entropy. Once again, random punctuation increases entropy, predictable punctuation does not. And the icing on the cake is that their example "My 1st Password!" reinforces every possible bad interpretation a novice could make of their advice. Intel should really be ashamed of this piece of work.