“Take your pants off and walk outside”

I’ll just finish off with a few more points

1. If your password is unencrypted or poorly encrypted, having a random string vs custom password makes no difference. The whole point of unique and strong password is so that a poorly encrypted service does not compromise your properly encrypted service. The scenario where my password is unencrypted is irrelevant, because only the salted hashed password matters. And because of the hash, leaking unencrypted passwords does not make the hashed ones easier to guess.

2. The whole issue with a manager isn’t that its bad, its that it puts everything under the one basket, even if its a hella strong basket. If you want to change my mind, you need to show the pros outweigh the cons. Straight up assuming that not using a manager somehow means anytime I have my password compromised equals everything else is compromised is not convincing, its circular reasoning.

3. Ignoring the fact that I’m explaining how hash works and not giving advice, if we want to be technical then yes only a slight change does make targeted attack easier. At that point password will only provide so much security, if you want to truely be safe, grade separate your username and email.

Thanks for the chat too, have a nice day

Edit: grammar

Then you should know that attackers don’t take your plain-text or cracked password and the start manually guessing similar codes on your other accounts, unless they are exactly the same. They always need to get a copy of your password (we’ll assume its hashed), then start the guess work using a decoder.

How secure your password is to the program depend on its entropy, which depends on the password’s length and possible characters. Two passwords are either exactly the same or completely different, and not how similar it “looks” to human.

Now, obviously if you make a easy-to-guess scramble (e.g. password123 becomes password123facebook for, well, facebook) then the hacker can do a custom decoder and this does compromise security. There are a lot of little tricks to avoid this, in anycase it will be secure as long as you maintain a high entropy.

if you’re interested, look up how modern encryption and password cracking works. Theres really no way for me to explain why what I’m doing is more secure than a manager when you don’t even know what “unique” or “random” means in encryption, let alone how to maximize them for security.

In anycase thanks for all the suggestions

Password managers holds the key to all my other accounts, where as a random poorly secured site do not. Of course I will have less trust in a password host, a compromised host means I also lose my banking and work account, but if a hacker got my free-manga.net password, well they can enjoy my shitty isekai collection for all I care.

The biggest security issue was always shared password leads to poorly secured site compromising highly secured sites, and thats why unique passwords are important. You might be thinking the change-one-letter password is similar to sharing password, but that is just not how hash works.

Changing even a single letter will completely scramble your password with hash, so for all intents and purpose it is equivalent to a unique password

Though I do admit it can get a bit tedious, I’ll definitly look into self-hosting, thanks for the recommendation

I don’t use them. I see this as a putting all eggs in one basket strategy, if my master password was lost, hacked, hosting company shutdown, or for whatever reason refuse to do business with me, my entire life would be screwed.

Instead I use long passwords made of words, and for each site it will be a few letters off. They’re easy for humans to remember because how similar they are, but due how hash works they are equivalent to unique passwords to hackers.

Here I’m referring to automatic load distribution. Expecting users to actively choose a good server requires quite a bit of technical knowledge (how servers work) and effort (search and compare), thats probably not something the general public is willing to do

unfortunately, probably not

it has nothing to do with how the coummnities are ran or what technology/apps we have, the issue is that decentralised networks almost always have worse infrastructures compare to centralised ones. lemmy.world is already lagging quite a bit, and eventually the admins will be overwhelmed by the shear number of users.

Unless federation figures out a way to distribute load or monetize for server cost, I dont think it will become mainstream