Bug 1246256 - package common password dictionary independently of other wordlists
Summary: package common password dictionary independently of other wordlists
Keywords:
Status: CLOSED WONTFIX
Alias: None
Product: Fedora
Classification: Fedora
Component: cracklib
Version: rawhide
Hardware: Unspecified
OS: Unspecified
unspecified
unspecified
Target Milestone: ---
Assignee: Tomas Mraz
QA Contact: Fedora Extras Quality Assurance
URL:
Whiteboard:
Depends On:
Blocks:
TreeView+ depends on / blocked
 
Reported: 2015-07-23 19:52 UTC by Matthew Miller
Modified: 2020-12-02 19:02 UTC (History)
3 users (show)

Fixed In Version:
Clone Of:
Environment:
Last Closed: 2020-12-01 15:14:18 UTC
Type: Bug
Embargoed:


Attachments (Terms of Use)
Mark Burnett's list of common passwords from xato.net (71.31 KB, text/plain)
2015-07-23 19:52 UTC, Matthew Miller
no flags Details

Description Matthew Miller 2015-07-23 19:52:15 UTC
Created attachment 1055492 [details]
Mark Burnett's list of common passwords from xato.net

See bug #865521, but this has a different context. The Fedora Workstation group would like a password policy for cases where password authentication is allowed for local login only (that is, no net access) explicitly to permit some common dictionary words, because they're easy to remember. The goal is simply to prevent a human attacker with limited time typing at the keyboard.

Therefore, a comprehensive english (or other language) dictionary is actually not desired. But, it would still be good to prevent 123456, password, qwerty, and similar. Therefore, it would be nice to have a cracklib dictionary focusing on these common passwords. Attached, find a list of 10,000 such passwords from security researcher Mark Burnett, released under CC-BY-SA from https://web.archive.org/web/20150315154609/https://xato.net/passwords/more-top-worst-passwords/.

The list is sorted; potentially, we only want the top 1000 or so. (I'll let Workstation people weigh in on that.)

Comment 1 Fedora End Of Life 2016-11-24 12:13:58 UTC
This message is a reminder that Fedora 23 is nearing its end of life.
Approximately 4 (four) weeks from now Fedora will stop maintaining
and issuing updates for Fedora 23. It is Fedora's policy to close all
bug reports from releases that are no longer maintained. At that time
this bug will be closed as EOL if it remains open with a Fedora  'version'
of '23'.

Package Maintainer: If you wish for this bug to remain open because you
plan to fix it in a currently maintained version, simply change the 'version' 
to a later Fedora version.

Thank you for reporting this issue and we are sorry that we were not 
able to fix it before Fedora 23 is end of life. If you would still like 
to see this bug fixed and are able to reproduce it against a later version 
of Fedora, you are encouraged  change the 'version' to a later Fedora 
version prior this bug is closed as described in the policy above.

Although we aim to fix as many bugs as possible during every release's 
lifetime, sometimes those efforts are overtaken by events. Often a 
more recent Fedora release includes newer upstream software that fixes 
bugs or makes them obsolete.

Comment 2 Fedora End Of Life 2016-12-20 14:18:22 UTC
Fedora 23 changed to end-of-life (EOL) status on 2016-12-20. Fedora 23 is
no longer maintained, which means that it will not receive any further
security or bug fix updates. As a result we are closing this bug.

If you can reproduce this bug against a currently maintained version of
Fedora please feel free to reopen this bug against that version. If you
are unable to reopen this bug, please file a new report against the
current release. If you experience problems, please add a comment to this
bug.

Thank you for reporting this bug and we are sorry it could not be fixed.

Comment 3 Tomas Mraz 2018-12-20 15:09:09 UTC
We are not going to pursue this RFE at this point. If there is interest in providing optional small cracklib dictionary feel free to provide PRs in Pagure.

Comment 4 Matthew Miller 2020-12-02 19:02:44 UTC
I've looked at this a little further, and it appears the actual cracklib file used at runtime is hard-coded rather than using all available files, which I had assumed because the "small" file is present. (Raising the question: how can that even be used?) So I'm thinking that it might actually make the most sense to make this a totally separate RPM which conflicts with cracklib-dicts. 

The space savings is pretty significant: the resulting subpackage I'm playing with is literally 0.01% of the size of the current cracklib-dicts file, saving 10MB.


Note You need to log in before you can comment on or make changes to this bug.