Live data from Hacker News

Frequent Password Changes Is a Bad Security Idea

schneier.com

21–30 of 59 posts

Re: Frequent Password Changes Is a Bad Security Idea

#21
post #14

At a client's who requires frequent password changes, people simply write out their passwords on post it notes that they stick onto their screens. Some security. (That's a bank, by the way).

I'd say that for most people, their physical security is stronger than their digital security.

Obviously sticking it on your screen is a terrible idea, but if it's in a drawer (especially a locker one), it's probably not going to get stolen, especially not in a bank.

Re: Frequent Password Changes Is a Bad Security Idea

#22
I suspect that the requirement of (1) changing the password every n days, (2) new password cannot be the same as previous m passwords (usually, m=10) leads to insecure passwords for most.

I've seen people handle such requirements by creating an initial password, say p@$$w0rd and then appending a digit to it. On any subsequent mandatory password change event, they increment the new password from p@$$w0rd0 to p@$$w0rd1.

Not sure if it leads to anything more secure.

Wish more people started to use GPG based password store such as pass [0].

[0] https://www.passwordstore.org/

Re: Frequent Password Changes Is a Bad Security Idea

#23
post #6

For those who work at corporations with password rotation policies, it may actually be a good way to get creative. This guy changed password rotations into a lifehack: https://medium.com/the-lighthouse/how-a-password-changed-my-... Previous discussion on it: https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=8015470

> Write these statements with the right mindset and attitude, and you’ll change your life.

I hope that the passwords thus created emerge from good thoughts and not otherwise.

Re: Frequent Password Changes Is a Bad Security Idea

#25
post #22

I suspect that the requirement of (1) changing the password every n days, (2) new password cannot be the same as previous m passwords (usually, m=10) leads to insecure passwords for most. I've seen people handle such requirements by creating an initial password, say p@$$w0rd and then appending a digit to it. On any subsequent mandatory password change event, they increment the new password from p@$$w0rd0 to p@$$w0rd1…

Mentioned in the article.

Re: Frequent Password Changes Is a Bad Security Idea

#26
post #2

Does anyone aside from HN type folks listen to these recommendations? I just had a major banking institution send me a plaintext pw instead of reset token, with a 15 char limit, and a rotation requirement.

I raise with a big client that reset my password to CompanyName123 and didn't let me change it.

Re: Frequent Password Changes Is a Bad Security Idea

#27
I usually deal with this by appending the month and year of the change to a secure password. Broken if the secure password is revealed, but no less secure than no rotation policy.

Where I work, we change passwords every 90 days, but every password other than full disk encryption, login and password manager are auto generated by password manager, so this mechanic is less of a concern.

Re: Frequent Password Changes Is a Bad Security Idea

#28
post #14

At a client's who requires frequent password changes, people simply write out their passwords on post it notes that they stick onto their screens. Some security. (That's a bank, by the way).

Frankly that's a hell of a lot more secure than using the same password to access both facebook and your (possibly confidential) company account.

Re: Frequent Password Changes Is a Bad Security Idea

#29
I have worked at a US DoD "secure facility". You can imagine the requirements they imposed on password length, characters, frequency of changing, uniqueness, etc. Perhaps you can also imagine that nearly everyone kept their current password written on a sticky-note somewhere in their desk.

Re: Frequent Password Changes Is a Bad Security Idea

#30
post #25
post #22

I suspect that the requirement of (1) changing the password every n days, (2) new password cannot be the same as previous m passwords (usually, m=10) leads to insecure passwords for most. I've seen people handle such requirements by creating an initial password, say p@$$w0rd and then appending a digit to it. On any subsequent mandatory password change event, they increment the new password from p@$$w0rd0 to p@$$w0rd1…

Mentioned in the article.

Happened to see that after posting the comment. So it's probably even more common!
Post reply on HN