• ragebutt@lemmy.dbzer0.comEnglish
    0·
    4 months ago

    Why not local

    Like just generate an md5 hash, truncate it to whatever arbitrary number the shitty website decided is their password length limit, then store it in an encrypted db

    Of course this is just a long way of reinventing keepass/1password/bitwarden/icloud keychain/etc

      • ragebutt@lemmy.dbzer0.comEnglish
        0·
        4 months ago

        An md5 of whatever string pops in your head at that moment. True randomness is a persons nonsequitors

        This makes sense. I had no idea what tools existed because as mentioned many db solutions exist for this

  • tuckerm@feddit.onlineEnglish
    0·
    4 months ago

    I like the little tools like this that DuckDuckGo has. A couple others:

    • “color picker”
    • “base64 encode your_text_here” (and “base64 decode encoded_string_here” as well)
    • “json formatter”
      • tuckerm@feddit.onlineEnglish
        0·
        4 months ago

        I think a lot of people turned against DDG when they started pushing their AI generated results really hard. Seems like DDG is going all in on AI. I have started paying for Waterfox’s search engine myself, after using DDG exclusively for years.

    • Godort@lemmy.caEnglish
      0·
      4 months ago

      This is probably fine. The connection to DDG will be over HTTPS, so a captured packet would need to be decoded first. And if someone were to manage to break the encryption, then they would also need to know what service you used the password for.

      Ultimately, it’s more secure to generate locally, but it would be a huge amount of work to get anything usable out of a packet capture

    • Telodzrum@lemmy.worldEnglish
      0·
      4 months ago

      If you’re going to use a password vault, use one you host yourself and not someone else’s service.

      • scintilla@crust.piefed.socialEnglish
        0·
        4 months ago

        The difference in complexity in setting up bitwarden and using your own self-hosted instance of bitwarden is fucking massive. For 99.9% of people rhem using bitwarden would greatly improve their password security and bitwarden has proven to be better than the competition.

    • Cethin@lemmy.zipEnglish
      0·
      4 months ago

      I use KeePass. It’s just a local file (which you can sync/host how you see fit if you need to). I don’t understand why people choose to use password managers hosted by other people. You almost certainly don’t need that, and it introduces issues and vulnerabilities with little upside.

  • state_electrician@discuss.tchncs.deEnglish
    0·
    4 months ago

    You can also just use “random password x” with x being a number. What I use more often is “random uuid” which I hope is self explanatory.

    • percent@infosec.pubEnglish
      0·
      4 months ago

      Fun fact: You can generate a random UUID in your web browser without needing to visit a website. Just open your browser console and type crypto.randomUUID()

  • chicken@lemmy.dbzer0.comEnglish
    0·
    4 months ago

    That’s fucked up, they should not do that. Even if they do it in a way that users are actually secure (maybe generating the password in the browser, nothing serverside?), it isn’t good to train people to trust a website for this.