2

I saw this post here that mentions one method of generating cryptographically secure passwords. Recently, I was given a similar task and took a different approach.

One of the answers in that questions used the following

tr -dc '[:alnum:]' < /dev/urandom | head -c20

My method looked more like the following:

dd if=/dev/urandom bs="$password_length" count=1 | base64

I didn't have a requirement for it to be alphanumeric-only, and no requirement for it to contain symbols or anything like that. The only requirements were that it's 8 characters minimum (I went with 80 in practice because, if it only needs to be read/used by a machine, why not?), and hard to guess.

Is there any (cryptographically significant) difference between the two methods (aside from length)?

2

Aside from length, no there is no difference at all. The former generates a 20 character password with a keyspace of 6220, whereas the latter generates a password with a keyspace of 28×bytes. Assuming bytes is at least 16, you will get 128 bits of entropy which is considered a safe minimum. Both these commands get their entropy directly from /dev/urandom. However, you do not need to use dd for this purpose which is rather inefficient. You can safely and slightly more efficiently use:

head -c"$bytes" /dev/urandom | base64
  • 1
    [:alnum:] is 62 in an ASCII-only locale like C or POSIX, and more in a non-English but single-byte (usable with urandom) locale. – dave_thompson_085 Apr 18 '18 at 5:32
  • Wow, I just realized I had been thinking of the alphabet as having 24 characters, not 26. I've been staring at too much disassembly... – forest Apr 19 '18 at 7:42

Your Answer

By clicking “Post Your Answer”, you agree to our terms of service, privacy policy and cookie policy

Not the answer you're looking for? Browse other questions tagged or ask your own question.