I’d say the approach is potentially vulnerable, but the tech isn’t quite there. The modern approach to password cracking is to take a huge dictionary, and run permutations on it, like change a’s to @'s, capitalizing first letters or adding numbers in the end. Any cracker worth their salt will have something like “add _netflix” as a permutation, too. I don’t think that anyone would have “NutFlex” in there, yet, but it’s possible if one of them stumbles on your leaked password from somewhere else.
As for “basic text”, do you mean like .txt’s? And do you store the entire password there? We do have viruses that scan for crypto wallets and it’s seed phrases already. It’s not too far fetched to imagine one that would cross-match any txt’s contents in the system with browser’s saved logins.
The most glaring issue I see is that the bastardization is effectively part of your password. With 1000+ passwords it’s going to be easy to forget (was it nutflix, sneedtflex, nyetflex or something?) and it’s going to be hard to find it if you don’t manage the codes properly. I recently had to scan over every single of my password manager entries (forgot a 100% random login, password and domain), and let me tell ya, It wasn’t fun.
You could possibly switch to a “client-side salting” approach, having a strong consistent password in you head, and storing a short but truly random suffixes for each service. e.g. text file named “Netflix” containing something like “T3M#f” and the final password would be something like “hunter2T3M#f”. At least that’s what responsible sites do to protect people who have simple/matching passwords. You could even store those suffixes somewhere semi-openly, like in a messenger as messages to yourself. But at that point, it’s probably easier to go with a password manager. Though that’s an option if you don’t trust those.
You could possibly switch to a “client-side salting” approach, having a strong consistent password in you head, and storing a short but truly random suffixes for each service. e.g. text file named “Netflix” containing something like “T3M#f” and the final password would be something like “hunter2T3M#f”.
I guess I’m not understanding how this is functionally different from what I already am doing. Why would your 12 character solution be more secure than my 14 character example? Is it just because NutFlex is two actual words, so a dictionary attack could crack that more easily? Or is it because it’s kinda close to the domain the account is associated with? Would I be significantly better off replacing those bastardizations with other random words?
Edit: and also, they’re saved as notes in my phone, and no I don’t type the whole password in. That would defeat the purpose of having a persistent master phrase as part of the password.
they’re saved as notes in my phone, and no I don’t type the whole password in
Then I must have misunderstood your approach. Is it like a single note with all the keywords only, then?
I guess I’m not understanding how this is functionally different from what I already am doing. Why would your 12 character solution be more secure than my 14 character example
Yeah, it’s because it’s close to the associated domain. The way I see it, this bastardization adds little entropy (there’s only so much possible variations) but also rather easy to forget. And a huge problem, in my opinion, is it’s using your mental capacity for per-site suffixes rather than master password.
A possible attack I see, is if I set up a site, say a forum called MyLittlePony.su with no password protection whatsoever, and lure you to register on it. If I scroll through the accounts and notice your password to be “hunter2MyLittlePenis”, I might go to paypal and give it a shot with “hunter2PenisPal”. Or, somebody whom I sold the database to, might. It’s extremely rare that anyone would even look at your password specifically unless you are some kind of celebrity, but it’s still a possibility. Maybe some future AI tech would be able to crack your strategy (I’ve tried, ChatGPT told me to fuck right off and FreedomGPT is not good enough yet)
Though you’ve said you also keep notes, which deals with the easy-to-forget part of the problem, so my first thought was to get rid of bastardization and add fuck-all amount of entropy by using a truly random suffix. That’d deal with the above problem. But, that’d mean that it’s your master password that is the suffix now, and you wouldn’t be able to access sites without the notes at all, hence it’d be easier to go with password manager at that point.
I’d say the approach is potentially vulnerable, but the tech isn’t quite there. The modern approach to password cracking is to take a huge dictionary, and run permutations on it, like change a’s to @'s, capitalizing first letters or adding numbers in the end. Any cracker worth their salt will have something like “add _netflix” as a permutation, too. I don’t think that anyone would have “NutFlex” in there, yet, but it’s possible if one of them stumbles on your leaked password from somewhere else.
As for “basic text”, do you mean like .txt’s? And do you store the entire password there? We do have viruses that scan for crypto wallets and it’s seed phrases already. It’s not too far fetched to imagine one that would cross-match any txt’s contents in the system with browser’s saved logins.
The most glaring issue I see is that the bastardization is effectively part of your password. With 1000+ passwords it’s going to be easy to forget (was it nutflix, sneedtflex, nyetflex or something?) and it’s going to be hard to find it if you don’t manage the codes properly. I recently had to scan over every single of my password manager entries (forgot a 100% random login, password and domain), and let me tell ya, It wasn’t fun.
You could possibly switch to a “client-side salting” approach, having a strong consistent password in you head, and storing a short but truly random suffixes for each service. e.g. text file named “Netflix” containing something like “T3M#f” and the final password would be something like “hunter2T3M#f”. At least that’s what responsible sites do to protect people who have simple/matching passwords. You could even store those suffixes somewhere semi-openly, like in a messenger as messages to yourself. But at that point, it’s probably easier to go with a password manager. Though that’s an option if you don’t trust those.
I guess I’m not understanding how this is functionally different from what I already am doing. Why would your 12 character solution be more secure than my 14 character example? Is it just because NutFlex is two actual words, so a dictionary attack could crack that more easily? Or is it because it’s kinda close to the domain the account is associated with? Would I be significantly better off replacing those bastardizations with other random words?
Edit: and also, they’re saved as notes in my phone, and no I don’t type the whole password in. That would defeat the purpose of having a persistent master phrase as part of the password.
Then I must have misunderstood your approach. Is it like a single note with all the keywords only, then?
Yeah, it’s because it’s close to the associated domain. The way I see it, this bastardization adds little entropy (there’s only so much possible variations) but also rather easy to forget. And a huge problem, in my opinion, is it’s using your mental capacity for per-site suffixes rather than master password.
A possible attack I see, is if I set up a site, say a forum called MyLittlePony.su with no password protection whatsoever, and lure you to register on it. If I scroll through the accounts and notice your password to be “hunter2MyLittlePenis”, I might go to paypal and give it a shot with “hunter2PenisPal”. Or, somebody whom I sold the database to, might. It’s extremely rare that anyone would even look at your password specifically unless you are some kind of celebrity, but it’s still a possibility. Maybe some future AI tech would be able to crack your strategy (I’ve tried, ChatGPT told me to fuck right off and FreedomGPT is not good enough yet)
Though you’ve said you also keep notes, which deals with the easy-to-forget part of the problem, so my first thought was to get rid of bastardization and add fuck-all amount of entropy by using a truly random suffix. That’d deal with the above problem. But, that’d mean that it’s your master password that is the suffix now, and you wouldn’t be able to access sites without the notes at all, hence it’d be easier to go with password manager at that point.