• Downcount@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      1
      ·
      1 year ago

      Yeah, you actually better not save the users passwords in plain text or in an encrypted way it could be decrypted. You rather save a (salted) hashed string of the password. When a user logs in you compare the hashed value of the password the user typed in against the hashed value in your database.

      What is hashed? Think of it like a crossfoot of a number:

      Let’s say you have a number 69: It’s crossfoot is (6+9) 15. But if someone steals this crossfoot they can’t know the original number it’s coming from. It could be 78 or 87.

      • Xandris@kbin.social
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        1
        ·
        1 year ago

        i was more wondering why a length limit implies anything about how they’re storing the password. once they receive the password they’re free to hash it any which way they want

        random memory—yahoo back in the day used to hash the password in the browser before sending it to the server, but TLS made that unnecessary i guess

      • twolate@discuss.tchncs.de
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        0
        ·
        1 year ago

        Dumb question: isn’t it irrelevant for the malicous party if it’s 78 or 87 per your example, because the login only checks the hash anyway? Won’t both numbers succesfully login?

        • foudinfo@jlai.lu
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          1
          ·
          1 year ago

          It’s actually a really good question. What you’re explaining is called a collision, by creating the same hash with different numbers you can succesfully login.

          This why some standard hashing function become deprecated and are replaced when someone finds a collision. MD5, which was used a lot to hash passwords or files, is considered insecure because of all the collisions people could find.