Closed covert-encryption closed 2 years ago
Done. However, this package has different cracking time estimation. :
{
onlineThrottling100PerHour,
onlineNoThrottling10PerSecond,
offlineSlowHashing1e4PerSecond,
offlineFastHashing1e10PerSecond
}
I chose to use the last one.
example when estimating the crack time for "quitelegitlongpwd" :
{
onlineThrottling100PerHour: 'centuries',
onlineNoThrottling10PerSecond: 'centuries',
offlineSlowHashing1e4PerSecond: '14 years',
offlineFastHashing1e10PerSecond: '8 minutes'
}
zxcvbn-ts shows lesser crack time estimation when using the built in zxcvbn(pwd).crackTimesDisplay.offlineFastHashing1e10PerSecond
compared to the TimeEstimates.displayTime((.7/100 * guesses)*costfactor(encode(pwd))
That's why i switched to default estimation.
Covert does custom calculation because we use stronger password hashing than anyone else, in particular for the short passwords (that the costfactor adjusts for). Are you saying that zxcvbn-ts does not offer the number or guesses (needed for that calculation) or that it has no pretty output formatting function like TimeEstimates.displaytime
?
Of the built-in options, onlineNoThrottling10PerSecond
would be closest to reality and can be used at least until the proper calculation can be implemented.
solved
Should use an actively maintained fork because Dropbox abandoned their open source development five years ago.
This one seems best: https://github.com/zxcvbn-ts/zxcvbn