News for hackers. Stuff that matters.
Re:Playing with ZFS encryption on Linux by RJIb8RBYxzAMX9u on Tuesday June 20, 2017 @12:15AM (#14592153)
At the risk of invoking Cunningham's Law, nobody uses passphrases anywhere near 64 bytes that he / she has to memorize. And if you're using a password manager, just use the raw or hex key option.

32 bytes => 64 hex digits, which is probably not a coincidence. :-)

Re:Playing with ZFS encryption on Linux by Freaky on Tuesday June 20, 2017 @08:05AM (#14593869)
> At the risk of invoking Cunningham's Law, nobody uses passphrases anywhere near 64 bytes that he / she has to memorize.

http://52.24.230.241/bc/password_generation.php

This produces memorable passphrases pretty close to that limit, as described in http://www-scf.usc.edu/~mghazvin/papers/marjan15.pdf

Re:Playing with ZFS encryption on Linux by takeda on Tuesday June 20, 2017 @01:32AM (#14592408)
Password yes, passphprase it's quite possible.
Re:Playing with ZFS encryption on Linux by takeda on Tuesday June 20, 2017 @01:36AM (#14592426)
Eh, Materialistic doesn't allow me to edit my comment. I mean you're right about passwords, but a passphrases (e.g. a sentences) are easy to remember, more secure and can often be longer than 64 bytes.
Re:Playing with ZFS encryption on Linux by yjftsjthsd-h on Tuesday June 20, 2017 @06:58AM (#14593504)
Er, of course it's not a coincidence; hex is base 16, so it takes 4 bits to represent each digit, which is half a byte. That is, hex always is 2 digits per byte.

Or did I miss your point?