It’s 2023, why are websites actively preventing pasting into fields like passwords and credit card number boxes? I use a password manager for security, it’s recommended by my employer to use one, and it even avoids human error like accidentally fat-fingering keys, and best of all with the credit card number I don’t have to memorize anything or know a single digit/character!

I have to use the Don’t Fuck With Paste addon just to be able to paste my secrets into certain monthly billing websites; why is my electric provider and one of my banks so asinine that pasting cannot be allowed? I can only imagine downsides and zero upsides to this toxic dark-pattern behavior.

There is even a mention about this in NIST SP 800-63B, a standard for identity management that some companies must follow in the USA, which mentions forcefully rotating passwords and denying “password paste-in” as antiquated/bad advice:

Verifiers SHOULD permit claimants to use “paste” functionality when entering a memorized secret. This facilitates the use of password managers, which are widely used and in many cases increase the likelihood that users will choose stronger memorized secrets

Edit: I discovered that for Firefox users there’s a simpler way than exposing your secrets to someone’s third-party addon. Simply open about:config, search for dom.event.clipboardevents.enabled, and change it from true to false.

Edit 2: As some have pointed out, that config value interferes with regular functionality on some sites. Probably best to leave it alone unless you know what you’re doing.

  • foo@withachanceof.com
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    43
    arrow-down
    2
    ·
    1 year ago

    Same reason some websites still have max password lengths of 12 characters: Bad programmers that don’t know what they’re doing when it comes to the most basic of security concepts.

    • deegeese@sopuli.xyz
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      42
      ·
      1 year ago

      Bullshit requirements like that come from product managers.

      Programmers would rather be lazy and not have to implement a limit anyway

      • foo@withachanceof.com
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        2
        ·
        1 year ago

        It goes both ways: Programmers have a responsibility to inform PMs how bad of an idea short max password lengths are. And if they’re still absolutely forced to implement it anyway, do you really want to be working somewhere that goes out of their way to purposefully implement poor security and somewhere that doesn’t respect serious concerns raised from their engineers?

    • Pechente@feddit.de
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      17
      ·
      1 year ago

      This one always surprises me. Who the fuck is not hashing passwords? What else is wrong with this site if such basic concepts are ignored?

      • Pika@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        9
        ·
        1 year ago

        or sometime they do hash the password but they are just ignorant of how it works so they keep the limit regardless

      • Caaaaarrrrlll@lemmy.mlOP
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        6
        ·
        1 year ago

        There’s a website that an apartment I stayed at used for registering vehicle license plates. They have a towing company come around at night and tow anyone not registered on the website. The website emails me my password in plaintext when I go to reset it. I’ve complained to the apartment manager and the website’s contact points, but gotten nowhere, they still have this behavior today. It’s ridiculously stupid and ignorant.

      • argv_minus_one@beehaw.org
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        4
        ·
        edit-2
        1 year ago

        If you use a proper password hash function, and some joker submits a million-character password, you’ve got a denial-of-service attack.

        The limit doesn’t have to be 12 characters, but there does need to be a limit.

        • PlexSheep@feddit.de
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          1
          ·
          1 year ago

          Why would that be a DOS? The hash of something is always the same length. Might only take a bit more time to compute, but a million characters isn’t that much with modern hardware. If anything, the risk of collisions would be higher.

          • foo@withachanceof.com
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            3
            ·
            1 year ago

            Hashing is typically done server-side. So you need to transmit the password to the server and you can’t have a truly unlimited data limit. Pretty much every web server will reject requests over some size so while it’s entirely reasonable to support something like a 1,000 char password if you really wanted to, having it be truly unlimited with something using a 10 million character password is a security/operational risk in itself.