Hacker News Reader

This is exactly the kind of batshit comment I'm talking about when I say Salvatore shouldn't be calling bcrypt "dogma", even when not using bcrypt is a reasonable choice for him.

In the nineteen seventies, Unix password files had random per user salts --- not salts derived from one another, but random ones --- and those password hashes were better than this one.

View on HN

Hi! As you are an expert in the domain, do you know if my method to generate personal password seems secure?

Typically, instead of memorizing a lot of random password, I memorize only one password and for each website I use the password:

sha1(password|domainname)

Until here nobody give me a clear answer, and therefore I assume it is secure while not any flaw is discovered.

And more precisely, I use

sha1(password|number|domainname)

because, if I fear my password was discovered, I change it by incrementing the number.

I would be very grateful if you mind answer my question. Thanks!

That's vulnerable to a length extension attack: sha1(passwd|am) can be used to derive sha1(passwd|amazon). (See Wikipedia for a discussion.)

Don't try to get clever, just use random passwords.

Thank you so much! It is exactly what I was looking for.

Reply on news.ycombinator.com