Note that there are some explanatory texts on larger screens.

plurals
  1. PO
    primarykey
    data
    text
    <p>I would think that for your admin page (one would think the most secure page) that you would want very tight security?</p> <p>If your "admin" user has a "hard to discover" username and that is paired with a very secure password I would think that this would be a better system.</p> <p>Ideally I think you would want to have a complex username and password:</p> <p>e.g.</p> <pre><code>Username: e4t_Gjw3@gp Password: q!-gr7cBFL045$bd </code></pre> <p><em>Update:</em> based on the comments I thought I would elaborate on why user+pass is more secure than a pass of "e4t_Gjw3@gpq!-gr7cBFL045$bd".</p> <p>Having both a username and a password doesn't double the security, it does much more than that.</p> <p>Pretend that usernames and passwords are both 3 characters (from A-Z) no case-sensitivity.</p> <p>To guess a password, using brute force, you would need up to: 26x26x26 = 17,576 tries.</p> <p>To guess just a username, same conditions: 26x26x26 = 17,576 tries.</p> <p><strong>If</strong> you had to guess both <em>but they didn't have to match</em> it would be 17,576x2 = 35,152.</p> <p>However, if you have to guess the username AND find the matching password it is more like:</p> <p>17,576 usernames * 17,576 passwords = <strong>308,915,776</strong></p> <p>Of course if you have up to 16 character usernames (using case-sensitivity, numbers, punctuation etc.) and the same for passwords, the number of possibilities is <strong><em>Insanely Huge</em></strong> and thus... secure.</p> <p><em>Update2:</em> I seem to have missed typing the key bit of info I was trying to relay in my update. In most systems I've seen or built, the username and password fields have a size restriction built into the SQL columns of 32, or 40, or X characters. In the ones I've seen where there is just a pass column, the size isn't typically doubled to 64, or 80 chars.</p> <p>Obviously the pass-only column, and set value can be doubled in length to account for the lack of username - but I have rarely if at all seen this done.</p>
    singulars
    1. This table or related slice is empty.
    plurals
    1. This table or related slice is empty.
    1. This table or related slice is empty.
    1. This table or related slice is empty.
    1. This table or related slice is empty.
    1. VO
      singulars
      1. This table or related slice is empty.
    2. VO
      singulars
      1. This table or related slice is empty.
    3. VO
      singulars
      1. This table or related slice is empty.
 

Querying!

 
Guidance

SQuiL has stopped working due to an internal error.

If you are curious you may find further information in the browser console, which is accessible through the devtools (F12).

Reload