logoalt Hacker News

tracker1yesterday at 4:46 PM1 replyview on HN

Yeah, I've gotten headway in this in other places I've worked... heavy advocate for the only requirement being a minimum length with the recommendation to use a "phrase" as well as not requiring rotation in terms of less than a year at a time if at all... though not strictly matching NIST, some ops find a never require change hard to swallow.

I wrote an authentication platform used by a few govt agencies. The irony is all my defaults match NIST guidelines (including haveibeenpwned lookup on password set/change), but needed to support the typical overrides for other hard requirements that tend to come from such agencies in practice.


Replies

thaumasiotesyesterday at 5:15 PM

>> Verifiers and CSPs SHALL NOT require subscribers to change passwords periodically. However, verifiers SHALL force a change if there is evidence that the authenticator has been compromised.

> though not strictly matching NIST, some ops find a never require change hard to swallow.

I think they're right about that. A scheduled change just represents the accumulating probability that there's been a compromise somewhere that didn't come to your attention.

It seems like it would make more sense for a scheduled change to affect all passwords at once, though.

show 2 replies