Why is the maximum length of OpenWrt’s root password 8 characters? The 2019 Stack Overflow Developer Survey Results Are InHosting providers limiting the password length or allowed charactersCan only see 2GB of 4GB on 2.6.26-1-xen-amd64 debian 5, Dell PowerEdge 860How I can identify which process is making UDP traffic on Linux?pam_cracklib on Linux: how to disable creditsHow to enforce password complexity in Redhat?Strange OpenVPN behavior - disconnects after one minuteAllow linux root user mysql root access without passwordTurn off password expiration after user changes password (Linux)Changing the root passworddisable maximum password length on Windows Server
How to create dashed lines/arrows in Illustrator
Could JWST stay at L2 "forever"?
Are USB sockets on wall outlets live all the time, even when the switch is off?
Why is my p-value correlated to difference between means in two sample tests?
What does "sndry explns" mean in one of the Hitchhiker's guide books?
What do the Banks children have against barley water?
How are circuits which use complex ICs normally simulated?
What are the motivations for publishing new editions of an existing textbook, beyond new discoveries in a field?
Access elements in std::string where positon of string is greater than its size
Patience, young "Padovan"
Dual Citizen. Exited the US on Italian passport recently
Inline version of a function returns different value than non-inline version
JSON.serialize: is it possible to suppress null values of a map?
Realistic Alternatives to Dust: What Else Could Feed a Plankton Bloom?
I see my dog run
Why is the maximum length of OpenWrt’s root password 8 characters?
What is the use of option -o in the useradd command?
Why isn't airport relocation done gradually?
Deadlock Graph and Interpretation, solution to avoid
Is domain driven design an anti-SQL pattern?
How to change the limits of integration
How long do I have to send payment?
In microwave frequencies, do you use a circulator when you need a (near) perfect diode?
Unbreakable Formation vs. Cry of the Carnarium
Why is the maximum length of OpenWrt’s root password 8 characters?
The 2019 Stack Overflow Developer Survey Results Are InHosting providers limiting the password length or allowed charactersCan only see 2GB of 4GB on 2.6.26-1-xen-amd64 debian 5, Dell PowerEdge 860How I can identify which process is making UDP traffic on Linux?pam_cracklib on Linux: how to disable creditsHow to enforce password complexity in Redhat?Strange OpenVPN behavior - disconnects after one minuteAllow linux root user mysql root access without passwordTurn off password expiration after user changes password (Linux)Changing the root passworddisable maximum password length on Windows Server
.everyoneloves__top-leaderboard:empty,.everyoneloves__mid-leaderboard:empty,.everyoneloves__bot-mid-leaderboard:empty height:90px;width:728px;box-sizing:border-box;
When I try to set root
's password:
root@OpenWrt:~# passwd
Changing password for root
Enter the new password (minimum of 5, maximum of 8 characters)
Please use a combination of upper and lower case letters and numbers.
It seems the maximum length is 8. If I try to set a password longer than 8, only the first 8 characters are valid. How can I set a longer password for root
?
My OpenWrt version:
Linux OpenWrt 4.14.108 #0 SMP Wed Mar 27 21:59:03 2019 x86_64 GNU/Linux
linux password root openwrt passwd
add a comment |
When I try to set root
's password:
root@OpenWrt:~# passwd
Changing password for root
Enter the new password (minimum of 5, maximum of 8 characters)
Please use a combination of upper and lower case letters and numbers.
It seems the maximum length is 8. If I try to set a password longer than 8, only the first 8 characters are valid. How can I set a longer password for root
?
My OpenWrt version:
Linux OpenWrt 4.14.108 #0 SMP Wed Mar 27 21:59:03 2019 x86_64 GNU/Linux
linux password root openwrt passwd
add a comment |
When I try to set root
's password:
root@OpenWrt:~# passwd
Changing password for root
Enter the new password (minimum of 5, maximum of 8 characters)
Please use a combination of upper and lower case letters and numbers.
It seems the maximum length is 8. If I try to set a password longer than 8, only the first 8 characters are valid. How can I set a longer password for root
?
My OpenWrt version:
Linux OpenWrt 4.14.108 #0 SMP Wed Mar 27 21:59:03 2019 x86_64 GNU/Linux
linux password root openwrt passwd
When I try to set root
's password:
root@OpenWrt:~# passwd
Changing password for root
Enter the new password (minimum of 5, maximum of 8 characters)
Please use a combination of upper and lower case letters and numbers.
It seems the maximum length is 8. If I try to set a password longer than 8, only the first 8 characters are valid. How can I set a longer password for root
?
My OpenWrt version:
Linux OpenWrt 4.14.108 #0 SMP Wed Mar 27 21:59:03 2019 x86_64 GNU/Linux
linux password root openwrt passwd
linux password root openwrt passwd
edited 1 hour ago
Peter Mortensen
2,14242124
2,14242124
asked 15 hours ago
Alan42Alan42
318112
318112
add a comment |
add a comment |
2 Answers
2
active
oldest
votes
This is because DES-based crypt (AKA 'descrypt') truncates passwords at 8 bytes, and only checks the first 8 for the purpose of password verification.
That's the answer to your direct question, but here's some general advice implied by your context:
Fortunately, from my reading,
MD5
in/etc/login.defs
is actually md5crypt ($1$), which, while a little outdated and no longer supported, is still far superior to DES-based crypt (and definitely much better than a raw, unsalted hash like plain MD5! Most unsalted hashes can be cracked on commodity GPUs at rates of billions per second)It looks like
SHA256
(actually sha256crypt) andSHA512
(actually sha512crypt) are also there. I would pick one of those instead.If you set your password to
password
or something under each scheme, you can visually verify whether or not my conclusion that they're the -crypt variants is correct (examples here are taken from the hashcat example hashes, all 'hashcat', some wrapped for readability):
Not recommended - unsalted or legacy hash types, much too "fast" (cracking rates) for password storage:
MD5 - 8743b52063cd84097a65d1633f5c74f5
SHA256 - 127e6fbfe24a750e72930c220a8e138275656b8e5d8f48a98c3c92df2caba935
SHA512 - 82a9dda829eb7f8ffe9fbe49e45d47d2dad9664fbb7adf72492e3c81ebd3e2
9134d9bc12212bf83c6840f10e8246b9db54a4859b7ccd0123d86e5872c1e5082f
descrypt - 48c/R8JAv757A
OK - much better than unsalted, no truncation, but no longer sufficiently resistant to brute force on modern hardware:
md5crypt - $1$28772684$iEwNOgGugqO9.bIz5sk8k/
Better - relatively modern hashes with large salts and work factors:
sha256crypt - $5$rounds=5000$GX7BopJZJxPc/KEK$le16UF8I2Anb.rOrn22AUPWvzUETDGefUmAV8AZkGcD
sha512crypt - $6$52450745$k5ka2p8bFuSmoVT1tzOyyuaREkkKBcCNqoDKzYiJL9RaE8yMnPgh2XzzF0NDrUhgrcLwg78xs1w5pJiypEdFX/
Of these, only descrypt truncates at 8. The last two are your best bet.
Note also that I'm only listing the hash types that are supported by /etc/login.defs on this platform. For general use, even sha256crypt and sha512crypt have been superseded - first by bcrypt, and then later by truly parallel-attack-resistant hashes like scrypt and the Argon2 family. (Note, however, that for interactive logins that should finish in under one second, bcrypt is actually more resistant to attack than the latter)
add a comment |
I modified this in /etc/login.defs
PASS_MAX_LEN 8
problem fixed.
====================
Important additions:
After I changed the above parameters, although I can set a password larger than 8 digits, it is still invalid because the real password is only the first eight digits. I don't know if this is my problem.
My final solution is to set
# ENCRYPT_METHOD DES
to
ENCRYPT_METHOD MD5
in/etc/login.defs
.
Now, I can finally set a root password that is really larger than eight.
9
Good fix, but bad original choice for a system default though...
– HBruijn
14 hours ago
6
I assume you changed your password to something longer than 8 characters now. Can you try if logging in with just the first 8 characters of your longer password works? Because it just might...
– marcelm
13 hours ago
7
You might consider changing that to SHA256 or SHA512 or they are supported - MD5 is considered broken these days.
– PhilippNagel
10 hours ago
5
really sha256 and sha512 by themselves aren't much better than md5. you need a salt, and use the crypt versions of these algorithms.
– SnakeDoc
9 hours ago
3
@PhilippNagel With a high-entropy password, it's not too bad. While MD5 should certainly be considered broken, the currently known weaknesses don't affect it for password hashing. What is a problem for password hashing is the speed; non-iterated MD5 is so fast that brute-forcing is very feasible for many passwords.
– marcelm
7 hours ago
|
show 4 more comments
Your Answer
StackExchange.ready(function()
var channelOptions =
tags: "".split(" "),
id: "2"
;
initTagRenderer("".split(" "), "".split(" "), channelOptions);
StackExchange.using("externalEditor", function()
// Have to fire editor after snippets, if snippets enabled
if (StackExchange.settings.snippets.snippetsEnabled)
StackExchange.using("snippets", function()
createEditor();
);
else
createEditor();
);
function createEditor()
StackExchange.prepareEditor(
heartbeatType: 'answer',
autoActivateHeartbeat: false,
convertImagesToLinks: true,
noModals: true,
showLowRepImageUploadWarning: true,
reputationToPostImages: 10,
bindNavPrevention: true,
postfix: "",
imageUploader:
brandingHtml: "Powered by u003ca class="icon-imgur-white" href="https://imgur.com/"u003eu003c/au003e",
contentPolicyHtml: "User contributions licensed under u003ca href="https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-sa/3.0/"u003ecc by-sa 3.0 with attribution requiredu003c/au003e u003ca href="https://stackoverflow.com/legal/content-policy"u003e(content policy)u003c/au003e",
allowUrls: true
,
onDemand: true,
discardSelector: ".discard-answer"
,immediatelyShowMarkdownHelp:true
);
);
Sign up or log in
StackExchange.ready(function ()
StackExchange.helpers.onClickDraftSave('#login-link');
);
Sign up using Google
Sign up using Facebook
Sign up using Email and Password
Post as a guest
Required, but never shown
StackExchange.ready(
function ()
StackExchange.openid.initPostLogin('.new-post-login', 'https%3a%2f%2fserverfault.com%2fquestions%2f962214%2fwhy-is-the-maximum-length-of-openwrt-s-root-password-8-characters%23new-answer', 'question_page');
);
Post as a guest
Required, but never shown
2 Answers
2
active
oldest
votes
2 Answers
2
active
oldest
votes
active
oldest
votes
active
oldest
votes
This is because DES-based crypt (AKA 'descrypt') truncates passwords at 8 bytes, and only checks the first 8 for the purpose of password verification.
That's the answer to your direct question, but here's some general advice implied by your context:
Fortunately, from my reading,
MD5
in/etc/login.defs
is actually md5crypt ($1$), which, while a little outdated and no longer supported, is still far superior to DES-based crypt (and definitely much better than a raw, unsalted hash like plain MD5! Most unsalted hashes can be cracked on commodity GPUs at rates of billions per second)It looks like
SHA256
(actually sha256crypt) andSHA512
(actually sha512crypt) are also there. I would pick one of those instead.If you set your password to
password
or something under each scheme, you can visually verify whether or not my conclusion that they're the -crypt variants is correct (examples here are taken from the hashcat example hashes, all 'hashcat', some wrapped for readability):
Not recommended - unsalted or legacy hash types, much too "fast" (cracking rates) for password storage:
MD5 - 8743b52063cd84097a65d1633f5c74f5
SHA256 - 127e6fbfe24a750e72930c220a8e138275656b8e5d8f48a98c3c92df2caba935
SHA512 - 82a9dda829eb7f8ffe9fbe49e45d47d2dad9664fbb7adf72492e3c81ebd3e2
9134d9bc12212bf83c6840f10e8246b9db54a4859b7ccd0123d86e5872c1e5082f
descrypt - 48c/R8JAv757A
OK - much better than unsalted, no truncation, but no longer sufficiently resistant to brute force on modern hardware:
md5crypt - $1$28772684$iEwNOgGugqO9.bIz5sk8k/
Better - relatively modern hashes with large salts and work factors:
sha256crypt - $5$rounds=5000$GX7BopJZJxPc/KEK$le16UF8I2Anb.rOrn22AUPWvzUETDGefUmAV8AZkGcD
sha512crypt - $6$52450745$k5ka2p8bFuSmoVT1tzOyyuaREkkKBcCNqoDKzYiJL9RaE8yMnPgh2XzzF0NDrUhgrcLwg78xs1w5pJiypEdFX/
Of these, only descrypt truncates at 8. The last two are your best bet.
Note also that I'm only listing the hash types that are supported by /etc/login.defs on this platform. For general use, even sha256crypt and sha512crypt have been superseded - first by bcrypt, and then later by truly parallel-attack-resistant hashes like scrypt and the Argon2 family. (Note, however, that for interactive logins that should finish in under one second, bcrypt is actually more resistant to attack than the latter)
add a comment |
This is because DES-based crypt (AKA 'descrypt') truncates passwords at 8 bytes, and only checks the first 8 for the purpose of password verification.
That's the answer to your direct question, but here's some general advice implied by your context:
Fortunately, from my reading,
MD5
in/etc/login.defs
is actually md5crypt ($1$), which, while a little outdated and no longer supported, is still far superior to DES-based crypt (and definitely much better than a raw, unsalted hash like plain MD5! Most unsalted hashes can be cracked on commodity GPUs at rates of billions per second)It looks like
SHA256
(actually sha256crypt) andSHA512
(actually sha512crypt) are also there. I would pick one of those instead.If you set your password to
password
or something under each scheme, you can visually verify whether or not my conclusion that they're the -crypt variants is correct (examples here are taken from the hashcat example hashes, all 'hashcat', some wrapped for readability):
Not recommended - unsalted or legacy hash types, much too "fast" (cracking rates) for password storage:
MD5 - 8743b52063cd84097a65d1633f5c74f5
SHA256 - 127e6fbfe24a750e72930c220a8e138275656b8e5d8f48a98c3c92df2caba935
SHA512 - 82a9dda829eb7f8ffe9fbe49e45d47d2dad9664fbb7adf72492e3c81ebd3e2
9134d9bc12212bf83c6840f10e8246b9db54a4859b7ccd0123d86e5872c1e5082f
descrypt - 48c/R8JAv757A
OK - much better than unsalted, no truncation, but no longer sufficiently resistant to brute force on modern hardware:
md5crypt - $1$28772684$iEwNOgGugqO9.bIz5sk8k/
Better - relatively modern hashes with large salts and work factors:
sha256crypt - $5$rounds=5000$GX7BopJZJxPc/KEK$le16UF8I2Anb.rOrn22AUPWvzUETDGefUmAV8AZkGcD
sha512crypt - $6$52450745$k5ka2p8bFuSmoVT1tzOyyuaREkkKBcCNqoDKzYiJL9RaE8yMnPgh2XzzF0NDrUhgrcLwg78xs1w5pJiypEdFX/
Of these, only descrypt truncates at 8. The last two are your best bet.
Note also that I'm only listing the hash types that are supported by /etc/login.defs on this platform. For general use, even sha256crypt and sha512crypt have been superseded - first by bcrypt, and then later by truly parallel-attack-resistant hashes like scrypt and the Argon2 family. (Note, however, that for interactive logins that should finish in under one second, bcrypt is actually more resistant to attack than the latter)
add a comment |
This is because DES-based crypt (AKA 'descrypt') truncates passwords at 8 bytes, and only checks the first 8 for the purpose of password verification.
That's the answer to your direct question, but here's some general advice implied by your context:
Fortunately, from my reading,
MD5
in/etc/login.defs
is actually md5crypt ($1$), which, while a little outdated and no longer supported, is still far superior to DES-based crypt (and definitely much better than a raw, unsalted hash like plain MD5! Most unsalted hashes can be cracked on commodity GPUs at rates of billions per second)It looks like
SHA256
(actually sha256crypt) andSHA512
(actually sha512crypt) are also there. I would pick one of those instead.If you set your password to
password
or something under each scheme, you can visually verify whether or not my conclusion that they're the -crypt variants is correct (examples here are taken from the hashcat example hashes, all 'hashcat', some wrapped for readability):
Not recommended - unsalted or legacy hash types, much too "fast" (cracking rates) for password storage:
MD5 - 8743b52063cd84097a65d1633f5c74f5
SHA256 - 127e6fbfe24a750e72930c220a8e138275656b8e5d8f48a98c3c92df2caba935
SHA512 - 82a9dda829eb7f8ffe9fbe49e45d47d2dad9664fbb7adf72492e3c81ebd3e2
9134d9bc12212bf83c6840f10e8246b9db54a4859b7ccd0123d86e5872c1e5082f
descrypt - 48c/R8JAv757A
OK - much better than unsalted, no truncation, but no longer sufficiently resistant to brute force on modern hardware:
md5crypt - $1$28772684$iEwNOgGugqO9.bIz5sk8k/
Better - relatively modern hashes with large salts and work factors:
sha256crypt - $5$rounds=5000$GX7BopJZJxPc/KEK$le16UF8I2Anb.rOrn22AUPWvzUETDGefUmAV8AZkGcD
sha512crypt - $6$52450745$k5ka2p8bFuSmoVT1tzOyyuaREkkKBcCNqoDKzYiJL9RaE8yMnPgh2XzzF0NDrUhgrcLwg78xs1w5pJiypEdFX/
Of these, only descrypt truncates at 8. The last two are your best bet.
Note also that I'm only listing the hash types that are supported by /etc/login.defs on this platform. For general use, even sha256crypt and sha512crypt have been superseded - first by bcrypt, and then later by truly parallel-attack-resistant hashes like scrypt and the Argon2 family. (Note, however, that for interactive logins that should finish in under one second, bcrypt is actually more resistant to attack than the latter)
This is because DES-based crypt (AKA 'descrypt') truncates passwords at 8 bytes, and only checks the first 8 for the purpose of password verification.
That's the answer to your direct question, but here's some general advice implied by your context:
Fortunately, from my reading,
MD5
in/etc/login.defs
is actually md5crypt ($1$), which, while a little outdated and no longer supported, is still far superior to DES-based crypt (and definitely much better than a raw, unsalted hash like plain MD5! Most unsalted hashes can be cracked on commodity GPUs at rates of billions per second)It looks like
SHA256
(actually sha256crypt) andSHA512
(actually sha512crypt) are also there. I would pick one of those instead.If you set your password to
password
or something under each scheme, you can visually verify whether or not my conclusion that they're the -crypt variants is correct (examples here are taken from the hashcat example hashes, all 'hashcat', some wrapped for readability):
Not recommended - unsalted or legacy hash types, much too "fast" (cracking rates) for password storage:
MD5 - 8743b52063cd84097a65d1633f5c74f5
SHA256 - 127e6fbfe24a750e72930c220a8e138275656b8e5d8f48a98c3c92df2caba935
SHA512 - 82a9dda829eb7f8ffe9fbe49e45d47d2dad9664fbb7adf72492e3c81ebd3e2
9134d9bc12212bf83c6840f10e8246b9db54a4859b7ccd0123d86e5872c1e5082f
descrypt - 48c/R8JAv757A
OK - much better than unsalted, no truncation, but no longer sufficiently resistant to brute force on modern hardware:
md5crypt - $1$28772684$iEwNOgGugqO9.bIz5sk8k/
Better - relatively modern hashes with large salts and work factors:
sha256crypt - $5$rounds=5000$GX7BopJZJxPc/KEK$le16UF8I2Anb.rOrn22AUPWvzUETDGefUmAV8AZkGcD
sha512crypt - $6$52450745$k5ka2p8bFuSmoVT1tzOyyuaREkkKBcCNqoDKzYiJL9RaE8yMnPgh2XzzF0NDrUhgrcLwg78xs1w5pJiypEdFX/
Of these, only descrypt truncates at 8. The last two are your best bet.
Note also that I'm only listing the hash types that are supported by /etc/login.defs on this platform. For general use, even sha256crypt and sha512crypt have been superseded - first by bcrypt, and then later by truly parallel-attack-resistant hashes like scrypt and the Argon2 family. (Note, however, that for interactive logins that should finish in under one second, bcrypt is actually more resistant to attack than the latter)
edited 4 hours ago
answered 10 hours ago
Royce WilliamsRoyce Williams
1,082614
1,082614
add a comment |
add a comment |
I modified this in /etc/login.defs
PASS_MAX_LEN 8
problem fixed.
====================
Important additions:
After I changed the above parameters, although I can set a password larger than 8 digits, it is still invalid because the real password is only the first eight digits. I don't know if this is my problem.
My final solution is to set
# ENCRYPT_METHOD DES
to
ENCRYPT_METHOD MD5
in/etc/login.defs
.
Now, I can finally set a root password that is really larger than eight.
9
Good fix, but bad original choice for a system default though...
– HBruijn
14 hours ago
6
I assume you changed your password to something longer than 8 characters now. Can you try if logging in with just the first 8 characters of your longer password works? Because it just might...
– marcelm
13 hours ago
7
You might consider changing that to SHA256 or SHA512 or they are supported - MD5 is considered broken these days.
– PhilippNagel
10 hours ago
5
really sha256 and sha512 by themselves aren't much better than md5. you need a salt, and use the crypt versions of these algorithms.
– SnakeDoc
9 hours ago
3
@PhilippNagel With a high-entropy password, it's not too bad. While MD5 should certainly be considered broken, the currently known weaknesses don't affect it for password hashing. What is a problem for password hashing is the speed; non-iterated MD5 is so fast that brute-forcing is very feasible for many passwords.
– marcelm
7 hours ago
|
show 4 more comments
I modified this in /etc/login.defs
PASS_MAX_LEN 8
problem fixed.
====================
Important additions:
After I changed the above parameters, although I can set a password larger than 8 digits, it is still invalid because the real password is only the first eight digits. I don't know if this is my problem.
My final solution is to set
# ENCRYPT_METHOD DES
to
ENCRYPT_METHOD MD5
in/etc/login.defs
.
Now, I can finally set a root password that is really larger than eight.
9
Good fix, but bad original choice for a system default though...
– HBruijn
14 hours ago
6
I assume you changed your password to something longer than 8 characters now. Can you try if logging in with just the first 8 characters of your longer password works? Because it just might...
– marcelm
13 hours ago
7
You might consider changing that to SHA256 or SHA512 or they are supported - MD5 is considered broken these days.
– PhilippNagel
10 hours ago
5
really sha256 and sha512 by themselves aren't much better than md5. you need a salt, and use the crypt versions of these algorithms.
– SnakeDoc
9 hours ago
3
@PhilippNagel With a high-entropy password, it's not too bad. While MD5 should certainly be considered broken, the currently known weaknesses don't affect it for password hashing. What is a problem for password hashing is the speed; non-iterated MD5 is so fast that brute-forcing is very feasible for many passwords.
– marcelm
7 hours ago
|
show 4 more comments
I modified this in /etc/login.defs
PASS_MAX_LEN 8
problem fixed.
====================
Important additions:
After I changed the above parameters, although I can set a password larger than 8 digits, it is still invalid because the real password is only the first eight digits. I don't know if this is my problem.
My final solution is to set
# ENCRYPT_METHOD DES
to
ENCRYPT_METHOD MD5
in/etc/login.defs
.
Now, I can finally set a root password that is really larger than eight.
I modified this in /etc/login.defs
PASS_MAX_LEN 8
problem fixed.
====================
Important additions:
After I changed the above parameters, although I can set a password larger than 8 digits, it is still invalid because the real password is only the first eight digits. I don't know if this is my problem.
My final solution is to set
# ENCRYPT_METHOD DES
to
ENCRYPT_METHOD MD5
in/etc/login.defs
.
Now, I can finally set a root password that is really larger than eight.
edited 10 hours ago
answered 14 hours ago
Alan42Alan42
318112
318112
9
Good fix, but bad original choice for a system default though...
– HBruijn
14 hours ago
6
I assume you changed your password to something longer than 8 characters now. Can you try if logging in with just the first 8 characters of your longer password works? Because it just might...
– marcelm
13 hours ago
7
You might consider changing that to SHA256 or SHA512 or they are supported - MD5 is considered broken these days.
– PhilippNagel
10 hours ago
5
really sha256 and sha512 by themselves aren't much better than md5. you need a salt, and use the crypt versions of these algorithms.
– SnakeDoc
9 hours ago
3
@PhilippNagel With a high-entropy password, it's not too bad. While MD5 should certainly be considered broken, the currently known weaknesses don't affect it for password hashing. What is a problem for password hashing is the speed; non-iterated MD5 is so fast that brute-forcing is very feasible for many passwords.
– marcelm
7 hours ago
|
show 4 more comments
9
Good fix, but bad original choice for a system default though...
– HBruijn
14 hours ago
6
I assume you changed your password to something longer than 8 characters now. Can you try if logging in with just the first 8 characters of your longer password works? Because it just might...
– marcelm
13 hours ago
7
You might consider changing that to SHA256 or SHA512 or they are supported - MD5 is considered broken these days.
– PhilippNagel
10 hours ago
5
really sha256 and sha512 by themselves aren't much better than md5. you need a salt, and use the crypt versions of these algorithms.
– SnakeDoc
9 hours ago
3
@PhilippNagel With a high-entropy password, it's not too bad. While MD5 should certainly be considered broken, the currently known weaknesses don't affect it for password hashing. What is a problem for password hashing is the speed; non-iterated MD5 is so fast that brute-forcing is very feasible for many passwords.
– marcelm
7 hours ago
9
9
Good fix, but bad original choice for a system default though...
– HBruijn
14 hours ago
Good fix, but bad original choice for a system default though...
– HBruijn
14 hours ago
6
6
I assume you changed your password to something longer than 8 characters now. Can you try if logging in with just the first 8 characters of your longer password works? Because it just might...
– marcelm
13 hours ago
I assume you changed your password to something longer than 8 characters now. Can you try if logging in with just the first 8 characters of your longer password works? Because it just might...
– marcelm
13 hours ago
7
7
You might consider changing that to SHA256 or SHA512 or they are supported - MD5 is considered broken these days.
– PhilippNagel
10 hours ago
You might consider changing that to SHA256 or SHA512 or they are supported - MD5 is considered broken these days.
– PhilippNagel
10 hours ago
5
5
really sha256 and sha512 by themselves aren't much better than md5. you need a salt, and use the crypt versions of these algorithms.
– SnakeDoc
9 hours ago
really sha256 and sha512 by themselves aren't much better than md5. you need a salt, and use the crypt versions of these algorithms.
– SnakeDoc
9 hours ago
3
3
@PhilippNagel With a high-entropy password, it's not too bad. While MD5 should certainly be considered broken, the currently known weaknesses don't affect it for password hashing. What is a problem for password hashing is the speed; non-iterated MD5 is so fast that brute-forcing is very feasible for many passwords.
– marcelm
7 hours ago
@PhilippNagel With a high-entropy password, it's not too bad. While MD5 should certainly be considered broken, the currently known weaknesses don't affect it for password hashing. What is a problem for password hashing is the speed; non-iterated MD5 is so fast that brute-forcing is very feasible for many passwords.
– marcelm
7 hours ago
|
show 4 more comments
Thanks for contributing an answer to Server Fault!
- Please be sure to answer the question. Provide details and share your research!
But avoid …
- Asking for help, clarification, or responding to other answers.
- Making statements based on opinion; back them up with references or personal experience.
To learn more, see our tips on writing great answers.
Sign up or log in
StackExchange.ready(function ()
StackExchange.helpers.onClickDraftSave('#login-link');
);
Sign up using Google
Sign up using Facebook
Sign up using Email and Password
Post as a guest
Required, but never shown
StackExchange.ready(
function ()
StackExchange.openid.initPostLogin('.new-post-login', 'https%3a%2f%2fserverfault.com%2fquestions%2f962214%2fwhy-is-the-maximum-length-of-openwrt-s-root-password-8-characters%23new-answer', 'question_page');
);
Post as a guest
Required, but never shown
Sign up or log in
StackExchange.ready(function ()
StackExchange.helpers.onClickDraftSave('#login-link');
);
Sign up using Google
Sign up using Facebook
Sign up using Email and Password
Post as a guest
Required, but never shown
Sign up or log in
StackExchange.ready(function ()
StackExchange.helpers.onClickDraftSave('#login-link');
);
Sign up using Google
Sign up using Facebook
Sign up using Email and Password
Post as a guest
Required, but never shown
Sign up or log in
StackExchange.ready(function ()
StackExchange.helpers.onClickDraftSave('#login-link');
);
Sign up using Google
Sign up using Facebook
Sign up using Email and Password
Sign up using Google
Sign up using Facebook
Sign up using Email and Password
Post as a guest
Required, but never shown
Required, but never shown
Required, but never shown
Required, but never shown
Required, but never shown
Required, but never shown
Required, but never shown
Required, but never shown
Required, but never shown