How to generate a random string?

The name of the pictureThe name of the pictureThe name of the pictureClash Royale CLAN TAG#URR8PPP











up vote
132
down vote

favorite
49












I would like to generate a random string (e.g. passwords, user names, etc.). It should be possible to specify the needed length (e.g. 13 chars).



What tools can I use?



(For security and privacy reasons, it is preferable that strings are generated off-line, as opposed to online on a website.)










share|improve this question























  • There are already good answers are at AskUbuntu. (I use apg personally.)
    – Sparhawk
    Sep 20 '15 at 13:07







  • 1




    @Sparhawk The AskUbuntu question/answers are more about listing tools. Please consider adding an answer here exhibiting how to use apg to generate a random string.
    – landroni
    Sep 20 '15 at 15:51






  • 1




    Be cautious about using random number generation on computers. Some are much less random than they appear, but telling the difference between 'good' and 'bad' random number generation is quite hard.
    – Sobrique
    Sep 21 '15 at 11:15










  • @Sobrique Excellent point about pseudo-random number generators (e.g. /dev/urandom). Would be nice to have some answers using true random number generators, based on e.g. random.org.
    – landroni
    Sep 21 '15 at 11:23







  • 11




    Joke answer: To generate a truly random string, place a new user in front of Emacs (or Vim) and ask them to exit. ;)
    – Wildcard
    Oct 30 '16 at 4:51















up vote
132
down vote

favorite
49












I would like to generate a random string (e.g. passwords, user names, etc.). It should be possible to specify the needed length (e.g. 13 chars).



What tools can I use?



(For security and privacy reasons, it is preferable that strings are generated off-line, as opposed to online on a website.)










share|improve this question























  • There are already good answers are at AskUbuntu. (I use apg personally.)
    – Sparhawk
    Sep 20 '15 at 13:07







  • 1




    @Sparhawk The AskUbuntu question/answers are more about listing tools. Please consider adding an answer here exhibiting how to use apg to generate a random string.
    – landroni
    Sep 20 '15 at 15:51






  • 1




    Be cautious about using random number generation on computers. Some are much less random than they appear, but telling the difference between 'good' and 'bad' random number generation is quite hard.
    – Sobrique
    Sep 21 '15 at 11:15










  • @Sobrique Excellent point about pseudo-random number generators (e.g. /dev/urandom). Would be nice to have some answers using true random number generators, based on e.g. random.org.
    – landroni
    Sep 21 '15 at 11:23







  • 11




    Joke answer: To generate a truly random string, place a new user in front of Emacs (or Vim) and ask them to exit. ;)
    – Wildcard
    Oct 30 '16 at 4:51













up vote
132
down vote

favorite
49









up vote
132
down vote

favorite
49






49





I would like to generate a random string (e.g. passwords, user names, etc.). It should be possible to specify the needed length (e.g. 13 chars).



What tools can I use?



(For security and privacy reasons, it is preferable that strings are generated off-line, as opposed to online on a website.)










share|improve this question















I would like to generate a random string (e.g. passwords, user names, etc.). It should be possible to specify the needed length (e.g. 13 chars).



What tools can I use?



(For security and privacy reasons, it is preferable that strings are generated off-line, as opposed to online on a website.)







password string random






share|improve this question















share|improve this question













share|improve this question




share|improve this question








edited Sep 26 '15 at 7:05

























asked Sep 19 '15 at 8:06









landroni

2,99582235




2,99582235











  • There are already good answers are at AskUbuntu. (I use apg personally.)
    – Sparhawk
    Sep 20 '15 at 13:07







  • 1




    @Sparhawk The AskUbuntu question/answers are more about listing tools. Please consider adding an answer here exhibiting how to use apg to generate a random string.
    – landroni
    Sep 20 '15 at 15:51






  • 1




    Be cautious about using random number generation on computers. Some are much less random than they appear, but telling the difference between 'good' and 'bad' random number generation is quite hard.
    – Sobrique
    Sep 21 '15 at 11:15










  • @Sobrique Excellent point about pseudo-random number generators (e.g. /dev/urandom). Would be nice to have some answers using true random number generators, based on e.g. random.org.
    – landroni
    Sep 21 '15 at 11:23







  • 11




    Joke answer: To generate a truly random string, place a new user in front of Emacs (or Vim) and ask them to exit. ;)
    – Wildcard
    Oct 30 '16 at 4:51

















  • There are already good answers are at AskUbuntu. (I use apg personally.)
    – Sparhawk
    Sep 20 '15 at 13:07







  • 1




    @Sparhawk The AskUbuntu question/answers are more about listing tools. Please consider adding an answer here exhibiting how to use apg to generate a random string.
    – landroni
    Sep 20 '15 at 15:51






  • 1




    Be cautious about using random number generation on computers. Some are much less random than they appear, but telling the difference between 'good' and 'bad' random number generation is quite hard.
    – Sobrique
    Sep 21 '15 at 11:15










  • @Sobrique Excellent point about pseudo-random number generators (e.g. /dev/urandom). Would be nice to have some answers using true random number generators, based on e.g. random.org.
    – landroni
    Sep 21 '15 at 11:23







  • 11




    Joke answer: To generate a truly random string, place a new user in front of Emacs (or Vim) and ask them to exit. ;)
    – Wildcard
    Oct 30 '16 at 4:51
















There are already good answers are at AskUbuntu. (I use apg personally.)
– Sparhawk
Sep 20 '15 at 13:07





There are already good answers are at AskUbuntu. (I use apg personally.)
– Sparhawk
Sep 20 '15 at 13:07





1




1




@Sparhawk The AskUbuntu question/answers are more about listing tools. Please consider adding an answer here exhibiting how to use apg to generate a random string.
– landroni
Sep 20 '15 at 15:51




@Sparhawk The AskUbuntu question/answers are more about listing tools. Please consider adding an answer here exhibiting how to use apg to generate a random string.
– landroni
Sep 20 '15 at 15:51




1




1




Be cautious about using random number generation on computers. Some are much less random than they appear, but telling the difference between 'good' and 'bad' random number generation is quite hard.
– Sobrique
Sep 21 '15 at 11:15




Be cautious about using random number generation on computers. Some are much less random than they appear, but telling the difference between 'good' and 'bad' random number generation is quite hard.
– Sobrique
Sep 21 '15 at 11:15












@Sobrique Excellent point about pseudo-random number generators (e.g. /dev/urandom). Would be nice to have some answers using true random number generators, based on e.g. random.org.
– landroni
Sep 21 '15 at 11:23





@Sobrique Excellent point about pseudo-random number generators (e.g. /dev/urandom). Would be nice to have some answers using true random number generators, based on e.g. random.org.
– landroni
Sep 21 '15 at 11:23





11




11




Joke answer: To generate a truly random string, place a new user in front of Emacs (or Vim) and ask them to exit. ;)
– Wildcard
Oct 30 '16 at 4:51





Joke answer: To generate a truly random string, place a new user in front of Emacs (or Vim) and ask them to exit. ;)
– Wildcard
Oct 30 '16 at 4:51











17 Answers
17






active

oldest

votes

















up vote
121
down vote













To generate a random password you can use pwgen:




pwgen generates random, meaningless but pronounceable passwords.
These passwords contain either only lowercase letters, or upper
and lower case mixed, or digits thrown in.
Uppercase letters and digits are placed in a way that eases
remembering their position when memorizing only the word.




Generate 7 passwords of length 13:



geek@liv-inspiron:~$ pwgen 13 7
Eu7Teadiphaec giepahl3Oyaiy iecoo9Aetaib4 phaiChae6Eivi athoo3igee8Co
Iphu4ufeDeelo aesoYi2lie9he


As mentioned in the comments, you can avoid reducing entropy by using the -s argument (i.e. generate more secure, completely random but hard to remember passwords):



geek@liv-inspiron:~$ pwgen -s 13 7
eAfycrPlM4cYv 4MRXmZmyIVNBp D8y71iqjG7Zq7 FQRHcserl4R8O yRCUtPtV3dsqV
0vJpp2h0OrgF1 QTp7MKtJyTrjz



To generate random user names you can use gpw:




This package generates pronounceable passwords. It uses the statistics of
three-letter combinations (trigraphs) taken from whatever dictionaries you
feed it.




Generate 7 passwords (user names) of length 13:



geek@liv-inspiron:~$ gpw 7 13
sreepoidahsas
risadiestinge
ntodynesssine
deodstestress
natinglumperm
riasigentspir
enderiferback





share|improve this answer


















  • 16




    +1 for not reinventing the wheel. If you don't want the reduced entropy of the "pronounceable" constraint, simply use pwgen -s.
    – Nate Eldredge
    Sep 19 '15 at 16:21

















up vote
120
down vote













My favorite way to do it is by using /dev/urandom together with tr to delete unwanted characters. For instance, to get only digits and letters:



head /dev/urandom | tr -dc A-Za-z0-9 | head -c 13 ; echo ''


Alternatively, to include more characters from the OWASP password special characters list:



</dev/urandom tr -dc 'A-Za-z0-9!"#$%&'''()*+,-./:;<=>?@[]^_`~' | head -c 13 ; echo


If you have some problems with tr complaining about the input, try adding LC_ALL=C like this:



LC_ALL=C tr -dc 'A-Za-z0-9!"#$%&'''()*+,-./:;<=>?@[]^_`~' </dev/urandom | head -c 13 ; echo





share|improve this answer


















  • 13




    Or do this: head /dev/urandom | tr -dc A-Za-z0-9 | head -c10 - This way is more accurate. You get 10 characters that are capitals, lowers, or digits
    – Brandin
    Sep 19 '15 at 8:47






  • 7




    The first head command might be problematic. It will output the first 10 lines from /dev/urandom, which means it will stop once it has seen the 10th newline. So the length of the output send to the tr command is random. It is possible that there will be less than 13 characters in the output from tr. I haven't computed the probability of this happening, the calculations are a bit tricky.
    – kasperd
    Sep 19 '15 at 22:40






  • 4




    Better do it like this: <dev/urandom tr -dc "$charset" | head -c "$length"
    – PSkocik
    Sep 20 '15 at 13:06







  • 3




    +1 Here's a quick attempt to include the other characters from the OWASP password special characters page, escaped for bash command line: tr -dc A-Za-z0-9!"#$&'()*+,-./:\\;<=>?@^_`~
    – Rup
    Jul 28 '16 at 10:26






  • 2




    @Rup I'm not sure what's not working with your tr .. command but just quoting everything (except for the single quote) works – tr -dc 'A-Za-z0-9!"#$%&'''()*+,-./:;<=>?@[]^_`~'.
    – Kenny Evitt
    Aug 18 '16 at 19:33


















up vote
69
down vote













I am using the openssl command, the swiss army knife of cryptography.



openssl rand -base64 12


or



openssl rand -hex 12





share|improve this answer


















  • 6




    rand -hex will limit the output to just 16 characters, rather than the 90+ on my keyboard. base64 is better because it's 64 characters, but it's not random (e.g. there are predictable padding patterns, and perhaps some characters appear more often than others).
    – Martin Tournoij
    Aug 27 '16 at 17:37











  • @Carpetsmoker: Note that the example openssl rand -base64 12 produces 16 characters of output (because 256 values are mapped to 64). And the hex example produces 24 characters. There's no loss in the case of the hex since it's a simple 1:2 mapping, but there might be a little in the base64 case since padding is used. The radix does not affect the randomness, it's the way one is mapped to another that does. (and the total bit count is much more important).
    – Dennis Williamson
    May 19 '17 at 20:29










  • The question was "How to generate a random string of a specific length" @DennisWilliamson, so while your comment is correct as such, it's not correct in the context of this question.
    – Martin Tournoij
    May 19 '17 at 20:31










  • @Carpetsmoker: In that case, neither is this answer.
    – Dennis Williamson
    May 19 '17 at 20:58






  • 1




    This answer deserves more upvotes. urandom, pwgen, gpw, etc may or may not be available on your system; also in different environments, a policy that works on one may not work on another. It would be a pretty dysfunctional setup to not have openssl. Even better: openssl rand -base64 32 | tr -d /=+ | cut -c -16 That'll give you 32 char minus non-alphanum's and trimmed to 16 char length. Makes it easy to deal with as an admin. Users only have alphanums (which they tend to appreciate). The length is long enough that the removal of special chars don't overly impact the entropy. Golden.
    – zentechinc
    Sep 5 '17 at 16:34

















up vote
11
down vote













Here is how, I do it. It generates 10 characters random string. You can optimize it by replacing the "fold", with other string processing tools.



cat /dev/urandom | tr -dc 'a-zA-Z0-9' | fold -w 10 | head -n 1





share|improve this answer
















  • 1




    +1 I like this approach, thanks. Allows to control both length and number of generated strings.
    – landroni
    Sep 20 '15 at 6:12







  • 3




    Achievement unlocked: Unnecessary use of cat!
    – user1338062
    Oct 25 '16 at 9:26










  • @user1338062 An unhelpful comment. OP presumably isn't running on a PDP-10 and can afford to waste the whole circa 4KB of RAM on running cat. Lots of people have explained (again and again since the mid 1980s) why they find the bash one-liner style using cat easier to read and edit.
    – jwg
    May 16 at 15:04


















up vote
10
down vote













To generate password with the highest entropy possible with standard Linux tools that are built into every distribution I use:



< /dev/urandom tr -cd "[:print:]" | head -c 32; echo


This outputs all of the ASCII printable characters - from 32 (space) to 126 (tilde, ~). The password length can be controlled with the head's -c flag. There are also other possible character sets in tr (to not include the space, just characters 33-126, use [:graph:]).






share|improve this answer
















  • 1




    In what way is this different from the existing answers? Specifically, herbert's comes to mind.
    – Fox
    Apr 27 '17 at 22:40







  • 3




    @Fox His solution uses hardcoded list of characters, which is not an encouraged programming practice because of code readability, compactness and cleanliness. Also some of the special printable ASCII characters could be interpreted by bash, not to mention the most obvious drawback of his one liner - if maximum entropy is desired, can one be sure that all of the available characters are included in the list? And that there are no duplicates which could possibly alter the tr's behaviour? His answer should be replaced by mine since you asked :)
    – drws
    Apr 29 '17 at 13:37






  • 2




    Many if not most web sites have restrictions on the characters that can be in a password, so hard-coding '[:print:]' doesn't feel any better to me than hard-coding the OWASP password special character list. I feel that almost every answer here could be improved by using a variable, but that is such a minor change that I'd only suggest an edit
    – Fox
    Apr 29 '17 at 13:54










  • < /dev/urandom tr -cd '[:graph:]'| tr -d '\' | head -c 32; echo if you dont want ` characters in generated string. ` because is an escape character in many languages causes problems
    – mzzzzb
    Mar 8 at 14:36

















up vote
7
down vote













Depending on the level of randomness you want, you could simply go with bash's (also zsh and ksh, possibly others) builtin $RANDOM variable:



$ echo $RANDOM | tr '[0-9]' '[a-zA-Z]'
bfeci
$ echo $RANDOM | tr '[0-9]' '[a-zA-Z]'
cijjj


The methods reading directly from /dev/urandom are far simpler, but for the sake of completion, you could also use $RANDOM:



echo $(for((i=1;i<=13;i++)); do printf '%s' "$RANDOM:0:1"; done) | tr '[0-9]' '[a-zA-Z]'





share|improve this answer






















  • How do you control the length of the generated string?
    – landroni
    Sep 19 '15 at 13:33










  • @landroni I don't think you can short of using a loop until you get the right length. $RANDOM will print a number between 0 and 32767.
    – terdon♦
    Sep 19 '15 at 13:36










  • I've tried running the command some 20 times, and I can never get anything longer than 4-5 chars...
    – landroni
    Sep 19 '15 at 13:38










  • @landroni yes, that's what I said, it generates numbers between 0 and 32767, so 5 digits will be the max. If you need longer ones or need to be able to specify the length, please edit your question and make that clear.
    – terdon♦
    Sep 19 '15 at 14:20







  • 2




    @landroni thanks, I've added a way to specify length but it's not very good. I'd just use something like rand=$(head -c 100 /dev/urandom | tr -dc A-Za-z0-9 | head -c13) instead.
    – terdon♦
    Sep 19 '15 at 16:12

















up vote
5
down vote













@Brandin explained in a comment to another answer how to get at most 100 bytes from /dev/urandom using head -c 100. Another way to do this is with dd:



tr -dc A-Za-z0-9 < /dev/urandom | dd bs=100 count=1 2>/dev/null


The 2>/dev/null at the end of the dd command is to suppress the "... records in / ... records out" output.



I'm not aware of any substantial advantages/disadvantages between these two methods.



I had an issue with both methods of tr complaining about the input. I thought this was because it didn't like receiving binary input, and hence suggested first filtering /dev/random with iconv -c -t US. However, Gilles suggested a different diagnosis and solution, which works for me:



LC_ALL=C tr -dc A-Za-z0-9 </dev/urandom | dd bs=100 count=1 2>/dev/null





share|improve this answer






















  • For some reason the iconv solution maxes one CPU core and doesn't yield an output (I waited some 10s before killing it)...
    – landroni
    Sep 19 '15 at 9:38










  • On my Ubuntu 14.04 system iconv is provided by libc-bin 2.19. I'm not sure if it's the same iconv...
    – landroni
    Sep 19 '15 at 13:36










  • tr supports binary input. However a range like A-Z may be influenced by locale settings. Try LC_ALL=C tr …
    – Gilles
    Sep 19 '15 at 20:27










  • @Gilles According to the POSIX spec it doesn't "support binary input". Only GNU tr does because it doesn't support multibyte at all (e.g. last time I checked it changing case was implemented by simply setting the sixth bit of every byte). Other systems (e.g. BSD) do support multibyte and this will fail there since the chance that a random input stream is also a valid multibyte stream is very small in most encodings. GNU may add multibyte support at any given moment, at which point this will fail. Of course, setting LC_ALL=C will fix that.
    – Martin Tournoij
    Aug 27 '16 at 17:33










  • @Carpetsmoker POSIX does require tr to process binary input (in the C locale). (Well, ok, it only says explicitly that null bytes are to be supported, it doesn't say that non-empty files not ending with a newline character are to be supported, but in practice that's always the case as well.)
    – Gilles
    Aug 27 '16 at 17:57

















up vote
3
down vote













You can use one of md5 tools that has precisely this purpose. In the case of creating a completely random password you can use the md5pass. It is a very simple tool to use and very helpful, since you can use "normal text" together with a "salt" to jump-bit construction of the same password that you can recover afterwards, or alternatively you may want to get a completely random password all the time. The general usage is:



md5pass [password] [salt]


where password is a chosen word that will be used for the construction of the random string and salt is the jump in bytes to be used. Like this:



md5pass word

$1$.MUittVW$j.XDTF1QRnxqFdXRUiSLs0


This will create a "a random sequence" password for you to use. If you use no salt, then you may not be able to recreate this same string afterwards.



However if you use a salt like this:



md5pass word 512

$1$512$.0jcLPQ83jgszaPT8xzds0


then you can create a sequence which you can recover if you use the word in conjunction with the same salt (or jump) if it was originally defined.






share|improve this answer






















  • When a salt is being used, this sounds similar to the PasswordMaker approach...
    – landroni
    Sep 26 '15 at 8:20











  • -Yes May sound similar to one maker password, but the difference is that it is not a commercial program or anything, because the set of md5 tools, "md5pass, md5sum, md5sum.textutils" dealt with here are concerned and are available the system at no cost some !!!
    – Paulo Maia
    Sep 26 '15 at 13:17










  • I actually had in mind PasswordMaker, which is also open-source and non-commercial.
    – landroni
    Sep 26 '15 at 16:43


















up vote
2
down vote













These two commands generate random passwords and passphrases, respectively.



shuf --random-source=/dev/urandom --repeat --head-count=20 file_with_characters | tr --delete 'n'

shuf --random-source=/dev/urandom --repeat --head-count=7 file_with_words | tr 'n' ' '


The password generator requires a file_with_characters containing all the characters you want the password to use, one character per line, and exactly one time each. The file must not contain blank lines, and lines must be newline-terminated.



The passphrase generator requires a file_with_words containing all the words you want the passphrase to use, one word per line, and exactly one time each. The file must not contain blank lines, and lines must be newline-terminated.



The --head-count option specifies the length of the password--in characters--or passphrase--in words.






share|improve this answer



























    up vote
    1
    down vote













    Inspired by Pablo Repetto I ended up with this easy to remember solution:



    shuf -zer -n20 A..Z a..z 0..9


    -z avoids multi line output



    -e echo the result



    -r allow any character to appear multiple times



    -n20 random string with a length of 20 characters



    A..Z a..z 0..9 allowed char classes



    shuf is part of the linux coreutils and widely available or at least been ported.






    share|improve this answer



























      up vote
      1
      down vote













      APG is the default software in linux distributions.



      To generate passwords from size 5 to 10 in subsets Special, Numeric, Capital un Small, it is :



      apg -MSNCL -m 5 -x 10


      Returns



      @OpVeyhym9
      3:Glul
      3DroomIc?
      hed&Os0
      NefIj%Ob3
      35Quok}


      As said by @landroni a comment.






      share|improve this answer




















      • Here are the options to generate random 14 letter passwords containing lots of special characters: apg -a1 -m14
        – neuhaus
        Nov 11 '17 at 19:10

















      up vote
      0
      down vote













      A super easy and simple (probably more simple than you're looking for) way to achieve this would be to generate a random number in a given range, convert that number to its equivalent ASCII character, and append it to the end of a string.



      Here's a basic example in Python:



      import random # import random library 
      passFile = open("passwords.txt", 'w') # create file passwords.txt
      passNum = int(input("Number of passwords: ")) # get number of passwords
      passLength = int(input("Password length: ")) # get length of passwords
      for i in range(passNum):
      password = "" # reset password
      for i in range(passLength):
      num = random.randint(65, 122) # get random number
      while num in range(91, 97): # Don't include punctuation
      num = random.randint(65, 122)
      password += chr(num) # add character to current password
      passFile.write(password + "n") # add current password to file
      passFile.close() # close file


      EDIT: added comments, and added code to generate multiple passwords and write them to a file






      share|improve this answer


















      • 2




        If given the power of Python I would NOT do it in this fashion. It would be much easier to use a join on a string containing all characters valid for a password and using random to select out the characters.
        – Mike McMahon
        Sep 20 '15 at 5:20











      • better to use Python like this code.activestate.com/recipes/578468-password-generator-mkpasswd
        – Grijesh Chauhan
        Sep 21 '15 at 9:16

















      up vote
      0
      down vote













      I maintain secpwgen in Alpine Linux & keep the sources on my Github.



      It can produce random strings or diceware phrases:



      musl64 [~]$ secpwgen
      USAGE: secpwgen <-p[e] | -A[adhsy] | -r | -s[e]> N

      PASSPHRASE of N words from Diceware dictionary
      -p generate passphrase
      -pe generate enhanced (with symbols) passphrase

      SKEY PASSWORD of N words from S/Key dictionary
      -s generate passphrase
      -se generate enhanced (with symbols) passphrase

      ASCII RANDOM of N elements (at least one option MUST be present)
      -A Each letter adds the following random elements in output:
      a alphanumeric characters
      d decimal digits
      h hexadecimal digits
      s special characters
      y 3-4 letter syllables

      RAW RANDOM
      -r output BASE64 encoded string of N random BITS
      -k output koremutake encoding of N random BITS


      To generate a 13 character random string you would use:



      musl64 [~]$ secpwgen -Aas 13
      ----------------
      WK5#*V<]M3<CU ;ENTROPY=67.21 bits
      ----------------
      INFO: destroying random number generator.
      INFO: zeroing memory.

      musl64 [~]$ secpwgen -Aa 13
      ----------------
      GP0FIEBM9Y3BT ;ENTROPY=67.21 bits
      ----------------
      INFO: destroying random number generator.
      INFO: zeroing memory.


      For users to remember a password use the diceware phrases:



      musl64 [~]$ secpwgen -p 5
      ----------------
      wq seen list n8 kerr ;ENTROPY=65.00 bits
      ----------------
      INFO: destroying random number generator.
      INFO: zeroing memory.


      I personally like:



      musl64 [~]$ secpwgen -r 512
      ----------------
      h62lL7G4gwh3/j9c7YteQvVXoqJrQKKPWVR3Lt7az36DcfWZWtUgBT19iwmJBwP4UahNzPe7qYD7OcklUFpCzQ== ;ENTROPY=512.00 bits
      ----------------
      INFO: destroying random number generator.
      INFO: zeroing memory.





      share|improve this answer



























        up vote
        0
        down vote













        I've found that piping /dev/urandom to tr on macOS didn't work. Here's another way:



        set="abcdefghijklmonpqrstuvwxyzABCDEFGHIJKLMNOPQRSTUVWXYZ0123456789"
        n=6
        rand=""
        for i in `seq 1 $n`; do
        char=$set:$RANDOM % $#set:1
        rand+=$char
        done
        echo $rand





        share|improve this answer



























          up vote
          0
          down vote













          I use:



          base64 < /dev/urandom | tr -d 'O0Il1+' | head -c 44



          This gives me 57 possible characters. The string can be copy-pasted (removed + and ) or printed and retyped as the difficult to distinguish characters (I1lO0) have been removed.



          • 44 characters gives me: log2(5744) > 256.64 bits of entropy

          • 22 characters gives me: log2(5744) > 128.32 bits of entropy

          I like this because:



          • it is simple to type/remember

          • it uses standard system tools - no extra binaries

          • doesn't "waste" much randomness (uses 89% of the random bits it receives vs ~24% for solutions directly piping to tr)

          • 22 and 44 characters pair quite nicely (just above even) common power of two breakpoints

          • the output can be easily selected and pasted or printed and retyped with minimal human error rates

          • shorter than hex encoded (32 and 64 instead of 22 and 44) solutions such as md5sum/sha1sum, etc.

          Credit to https://unix.stackexchange.com/a/230676/9583 and especially the comments for my initial inspiration.





          share



























            up vote
            -1
            down vote













            I'd like this command:



            date +%s | sha256sum | base64 | head -c 12





            share|improve this answer
















            • 1




              I would rather use more random nanoseconds approach: date +%N Since if you generate many users and passwords in a script, the seconds might become same for many or even for all date commands, thus producing identical passwords.
              – John Mayor
              Apr 28 '17 at 12:53






            • 1




              @JohnMayor: is this approach more robust: dd if=/dev/random bs=512 count=1 ?
              – Eugen Konkov
              Apr 28 '17 at 13:48






            • 5




              This answers is highly dangerous! You generate the password(s) from a known seed which is easy to predict. I could generate all passwords generated using this method of the last years and use this list for brute forcing purposes.
              – Flow
              Jul 1 '17 at 17:20


















            up vote
            -3
            down vote













            I go, to
            http://passwordsgenerator.net/
            it allows generating strings of random characters up to 2048 characters, selecting upper case, lower case, digits 0 to 9, punctuation marks, or any combination.






            share|improve this answer
















            • 1




              I've clarified the question to make it explicit that off-line generated strings are preferable. Generating a password directly on a website, especially if the connection is not HTTPS (as in your answer), is not secure.
              – landroni
              Sep 26 '15 at 7:09










            • Getting a random password from the internet is spectacularly stupid & naive. Someone now knows a password you are using for some service or site and unique personal details about you (IP address, browser/environment info). This site can now cross-reference the info with other data collected about you. For example, you once posted to a mailing list, your IP address is in the mail’s header, so we now have a password, name, and an email address... You are really trusting random strangers with your passwords here.
              – Martin Tournoij
              Aug 27 '16 at 17:35










            Your Answer







            StackExchange.ready(function()
            var channelOptions =
            tags: "".split(" "),
            id: "106"
            ;
            initTagRenderer("".split(" "), "".split(" "), channelOptions);

            StackExchange.using("externalEditor", function()
            // Have to fire editor after snippets, if snippets enabled
            if (StackExchange.settings.snippets.snippetsEnabled)
            StackExchange.using("snippets", function()
            createEditor();
            );

            else
            createEditor();

            );

            function createEditor()
            StackExchange.prepareEditor(
            heartbeatType: 'answer',
            convertImagesToLinks: false,
            noModals: false,
            showLowRepImageUploadWarning: true,
            reputationToPostImages: null,
            bindNavPrevention: true,
            postfix: "",
            onDemand: true,
            discardSelector: ".discard-answer"
            ,immediatelyShowMarkdownHelp:true
            );



            );













             

            draft saved


            draft discarded


















            StackExchange.ready(
            function ()
            StackExchange.openid.initPostLogin('.new-post-login', 'https%3a%2f%2funix.stackexchange.com%2fquestions%2f230673%2fhow-to-generate-a-random-string%23new-answer', 'question_page');

            );

            Post as a guest






























            17 Answers
            17






            active

            oldest

            votes








            17 Answers
            17






            active

            oldest

            votes









            active

            oldest

            votes






            active

            oldest

            votes








            up vote
            121
            down vote













            To generate a random password you can use pwgen:




            pwgen generates random, meaningless but pronounceable passwords.
            These passwords contain either only lowercase letters, or upper
            and lower case mixed, or digits thrown in.
            Uppercase letters and digits are placed in a way that eases
            remembering their position when memorizing only the word.




            Generate 7 passwords of length 13:



            geek@liv-inspiron:~$ pwgen 13 7
            Eu7Teadiphaec giepahl3Oyaiy iecoo9Aetaib4 phaiChae6Eivi athoo3igee8Co
            Iphu4ufeDeelo aesoYi2lie9he


            As mentioned in the comments, you can avoid reducing entropy by using the -s argument (i.e. generate more secure, completely random but hard to remember passwords):



            geek@liv-inspiron:~$ pwgen -s 13 7
            eAfycrPlM4cYv 4MRXmZmyIVNBp D8y71iqjG7Zq7 FQRHcserl4R8O yRCUtPtV3dsqV
            0vJpp2h0OrgF1 QTp7MKtJyTrjz



            To generate random user names you can use gpw:




            This package generates pronounceable passwords. It uses the statistics of
            three-letter combinations (trigraphs) taken from whatever dictionaries you
            feed it.




            Generate 7 passwords (user names) of length 13:



            geek@liv-inspiron:~$ gpw 7 13
            sreepoidahsas
            risadiestinge
            ntodynesssine
            deodstestress
            natinglumperm
            riasigentspir
            enderiferback





            share|improve this answer


















            • 16




              +1 for not reinventing the wheel. If you don't want the reduced entropy of the "pronounceable" constraint, simply use pwgen -s.
              – Nate Eldredge
              Sep 19 '15 at 16:21














            up vote
            121
            down vote













            To generate a random password you can use pwgen:




            pwgen generates random, meaningless but pronounceable passwords.
            These passwords contain either only lowercase letters, or upper
            and lower case mixed, or digits thrown in.
            Uppercase letters and digits are placed in a way that eases
            remembering their position when memorizing only the word.




            Generate 7 passwords of length 13:



            geek@liv-inspiron:~$ pwgen 13 7
            Eu7Teadiphaec giepahl3Oyaiy iecoo9Aetaib4 phaiChae6Eivi athoo3igee8Co
            Iphu4ufeDeelo aesoYi2lie9he


            As mentioned in the comments, you can avoid reducing entropy by using the -s argument (i.e. generate more secure, completely random but hard to remember passwords):



            geek@liv-inspiron:~$ pwgen -s 13 7
            eAfycrPlM4cYv 4MRXmZmyIVNBp D8y71iqjG7Zq7 FQRHcserl4R8O yRCUtPtV3dsqV
            0vJpp2h0OrgF1 QTp7MKtJyTrjz



            To generate random user names you can use gpw:




            This package generates pronounceable passwords. It uses the statistics of
            three-letter combinations (trigraphs) taken from whatever dictionaries you
            feed it.




            Generate 7 passwords (user names) of length 13:



            geek@liv-inspiron:~$ gpw 7 13
            sreepoidahsas
            risadiestinge
            ntodynesssine
            deodstestress
            natinglumperm
            riasigentspir
            enderiferback





            share|improve this answer


















            • 16




              +1 for not reinventing the wheel. If you don't want the reduced entropy of the "pronounceable" constraint, simply use pwgen -s.
              – Nate Eldredge
              Sep 19 '15 at 16:21












            up vote
            121
            down vote










            up vote
            121
            down vote









            To generate a random password you can use pwgen:




            pwgen generates random, meaningless but pronounceable passwords.
            These passwords contain either only lowercase letters, or upper
            and lower case mixed, or digits thrown in.
            Uppercase letters and digits are placed in a way that eases
            remembering their position when memorizing only the word.




            Generate 7 passwords of length 13:



            geek@liv-inspiron:~$ pwgen 13 7
            Eu7Teadiphaec giepahl3Oyaiy iecoo9Aetaib4 phaiChae6Eivi athoo3igee8Co
            Iphu4ufeDeelo aesoYi2lie9he


            As mentioned in the comments, you can avoid reducing entropy by using the -s argument (i.e. generate more secure, completely random but hard to remember passwords):



            geek@liv-inspiron:~$ pwgen -s 13 7
            eAfycrPlM4cYv 4MRXmZmyIVNBp D8y71iqjG7Zq7 FQRHcserl4R8O yRCUtPtV3dsqV
            0vJpp2h0OrgF1 QTp7MKtJyTrjz



            To generate random user names you can use gpw:




            This package generates pronounceable passwords. It uses the statistics of
            three-letter combinations (trigraphs) taken from whatever dictionaries you
            feed it.




            Generate 7 passwords (user names) of length 13:



            geek@liv-inspiron:~$ gpw 7 13
            sreepoidahsas
            risadiestinge
            ntodynesssine
            deodstestress
            natinglumperm
            riasigentspir
            enderiferback





            share|improve this answer














            To generate a random password you can use pwgen:




            pwgen generates random, meaningless but pronounceable passwords.
            These passwords contain either only lowercase letters, or upper
            and lower case mixed, or digits thrown in.
            Uppercase letters and digits are placed in a way that eases
            remembering their position when memorizing only the word.




            Generate 7 passwords of length 13:



            geek@liv-inspiron:~$ pwgen 13 7
            Eu7Teadiphaec giepahl3Oyaiy iecoo9Aetaib4 phaiChae6Eivi athoo3igee8Co
            Iphu4ufeDeelo aesoYi2lie9he


            As mentioned in the comments, you can avoid reducing entropy by using the -s argument (i.e. generate more secure, completely random but hard to remember passwords):



            geek@liv-inspiron:~$ pwgen -s 13 7
            eAfycrPlM4cYv 4MRXmZmyIVNBp D8y71iqjG7Zq7 FQRHcserl4R8O yRCUtPtV3dsqV
            0vJpp2h0OrgF1 QTp7MKtJyTrjz



            To generate random user names you can use gpw:




            This package generates pronounceable passwords. It uses the statistics of
            three-letter combinations (trigraphs) taken from whatever dictionaries you
            feed it.




            Generate 7 passwords (user names) of length 13:



            geek@liv-inspiron:~$ gpw 7 13
            sreepoidahsas
            risadiestinge
            ntodynesssine
            deodstestress
            natinglumperm
            riasigentspir
            enderiferback






            share|improve this answer














            share|improve this answer



            share|improve this answer








            edited Sep 19 '15 at 16:52

























            answered Sep 19 '15 at 8:11









            landroni

            2,99582235




            2,99582235







            • 16




              +1 for not reinventing the wheel. If you don't want the reduced entropy of the "pronounceable" constraint, simply use pwgen -s.
              – Nate Eldredge
              Sep 19 '15 at 16:21












            • 16




              +1 for not reinventing the wheel. If you don't want the reduced entropy of the "pronounceable" constraint, simply use pwgen -s.
              – Nate Eldredge
              Sep 19 '15 at 16:21







            16




            16




            +1 for not reinventing the wheel. If you don't want the reduced entropy of the "pronounceable" constraint, simply use pwgen -s.
            – Nate Eldredge
            Sep 19 '15 at 16:21




            +1 for not reinventing the wheel. If you don't want the reduced entropy of the "pronounceable" constraint, simply use pwgen -s.
            – Nate Eldredge
            Sep 19 '15 at 16:21












            up vote
            120
            down vote













            My favorite way to do it is by using /dev/urandom together with tr to delete unwanted characters. For instance, to get only digits and letters:



            head /dev/urandom | tr -dc A-Za-z0-9 | head -c 13 ; echo ''


            Alternatively, to include more characters from the OWASP password special characters list:



            </dev/urandom tr -dc 'A-Za-z0-9!"#$%&'''()*+,-./:;<=>?@[]^_`~' | head -c 13 ; echo


            If you have some problems with tr complaining about the input, try adding LC_ALL=C like this:



            LC_ALL=C tr -dc 'A-Za-z0-9!"#$%&'''()*+,-./:;<=>?@[]^_`~' </dev/urandom | head -c 13 ; echo





            share|improve this answer


















            • 13




              Or do this: head /dev/urandom | tr -dc A-Za-z0-9 | head -c10 - This way is more accurate. You get 10 characters that are capitals, lowers, or digits
              – Brandin
              Sep 19 '15 at 8:47






            • 7




              The first head command might be problematic. It will output the first 10 lines from /dev/urandom, which means it will stop once it has seen the 10th newline. So the length of the output send to the tr command is random. It is possible that there will be less than 13 characters in the output from tr. I haven't computed the probability of this happening, the calculations are a bit tricky.
              – kasperd
              Sep 19 '15 at 22:40






            • 4




              Better do it like this: <dev/urandom tr -dc "$charset" | head -c "$length"
              – PSkocik
              Sep 20 '15 at 13:06







            • 3




              +1 Here's a quick attempt to include the other characters from the OWASP password special characters page, escaped for bash command line: tr -dc A-Za-z0-9!"#$&'()*+,-./:\\;<=>?@^_`~
              – Rup
              Jul 28 '16 at 10:26






            • 2




              @Rup I'm not sure what's not working with your tr .. command but just quoting everything (except for the single quote) works – tr -dc 'A-Za-z0-9!"#$%&'''()*+,-./:;<=>?@[]^_`~'.
              – Kenny Evitt
              Aug 18 '16 at 19:33















            up vote
            120
            down vote













            My favorite way to do it is by using /dev/urandom together with tr to delete unwanted characters. For instance, to get only digits and letters:



            head /dev/urandom | tr -dc A-Za-z0-9 | head -c 13 ; echo ''


            Alternatively, to include more characters from the OWASP password special characters list:



            </dev/urandom tr -dc 'A-Za-z0-9!"#$%&'''()*+,-./:;<=>?@[]^_`~' | head -c 13 ; echo


            If you have some problems with tr complaining about the input, try adding LC_ALL=C like this:



            LC_ALL=C tr -dc 'A-Za-z0-9!"#$%&'''()*+,-./:;<=>?@[]^_`~' </dev/urandom | head -c 13 ; echo





            share|improve this answer


















            • 13




              Or do this: head /dev/urandom | tr -dc A-Za-z0-9 | head -c10 - This way is more accurate. You get 10 characters that are capitals, lowers, or digits
              – Brandin
              Sep 19 '15 at 8:47






            • 7




              The first head command might be problematic. It will output the first 10 lines from /dev/urandom, which means it will stop once it has seen the 10th newline. So the length of the output send to the tr command is random. It is possible that there will be less than 13 characters in the output from tr. I haven't computed the probability of this happening, the calculations are a bit tricky.
              – kasperd
              Sep 19 '15 at 22:40






            • 4




              Better do it like this: <dev/urandom tr -dc "$charset" | head -c "$length"
              – PSkocik
              Sep 20 '15 at 13:06







            • 3




              +1 Here's a quick attempt to include the other characters from the OWASP password special characters page, escaped for bash command line: tr -dc A-Za-z0-9!"#$&'()*+,-./:\\;<=>?@^_`~
              – Rup
              Jul 28 '16 at 10:26






            • 2




              @Rup I'm not sure what's not working with your tr .. command but just quoting everything (except for the single quote) works – tr -dc 'A-Za-z0-9!"#$%&'''()*+,-./:;<=>?@[]^_`~'.
              – Kenny Evitt
              Aug 18 '16 at 19:33













            up vote
            120
            down vote










            up vote
            120
            down vote









            My favorite way to do it is by using /dev/urandom together with tr to delete unwanted characters. For instance, to get only digits and letters:



            head /dev/urandom | tr -dc A-Za-z0-9 | head -c 13 ; echo ''


            Alternatively, to include more characters from the OWASP password special characters list:



            </dev/urandom tr -dc 'A-Za-z0-9!"#$%&'''()*+,-./:;<=>?@[]^_`~' | head -c 13 ; echo


            If you have some problems with tr complaining about the input, try adding LC_ALL=C like this:



            LC_ALL=C tr -dc 'A-Za-z0-9!"#$%&'''()*+,-./:;<=>?@[]^_`~' </dev/urandom | head -c 13 ; echo





            share|improve this answer














            My favorite way to do it is by using /dev/urandom together with tr to delete unwanted characters. For instance, to get only digits and letters:



            head /dev/urandom | tr -dc A-Za-z0-9 | head -c 13 ; echo ''


            Alternatively, to include more characters from the OWASP password special characters list:



            </dev/urandom tr -dc 'A-Za-z0-9!"#$%&'''()*+,-./:;<=>?@[]^_`~' | head -c 13 ; echo


            If you have some problems with tr complaining about the input, try adding LC_ALL=C like this:



            LC_ALL=C tr -dc 'A-Za-z0-9!"#$%&'''()*+,-./:;<=>?@[]^_`~' </dev/urandom | head -c 13 ; echo






            share|improve this answer














            share|improve this answer



            share|improve this answer








            edited Apr 13 '17 at 12:36









            Community♦

            1




            1










            answered Sep 19 '15 at 8:18









            herbert

            1,579148




            1,579148







            • 13




              Or do this: head /dev/urandom | tr -dc A-Za-z0-9 | head -c10 - This way is more accurate. You get 10 characters that are capitals, lowers, or digits
              – Brandin
              Sep 19 '15 at 8:47






            • 7




              The first head command might be problematic. It will output the first 10 lines from /dev/urandom, which means it will stop once it has seen the 10th newline. So the length of the output send to the tr command is random. It is possible that there will be less than 13 characters in the output from tr. I haven't computed the probability of this happening, the calculations are a bit tricky.
              – kasperd
              Sep 19 '15 at 22:40






            • 4




              Better do it like this: <dev/urandom tr -dc "$charset" | head -c "$length"
              – PSkocik
              Sep 20 '15 at 13:06







            • 3




              +1 Here's a quick attempt to include the other characters from the OWASP password special characters page, escaped for bash command line: tr -dc A-Za-z0-9!"#$&'()*+,-./:\\;<=>?@^_`~
              – Rup
              Jul 28 '16 at 10:26






            • 2




              @Rup I'm not sure what's not working with your tr .. command but just quoting everything (except for the single quote) works – tr -dc 'A-Za-z0-9!"#$%&'''()*+,-./:;<=>?@[]^_`~'.
              – Kenny Evitt
              Aug 18 '16 at 19:33













            • 13




              Or do this: head /dev/urandom | tr -dc A-Za-z0-9 | head -c10 - This way is more accurate. You get 10 characters that are capitals, lowers, or digits
              – Brandin
              Sep 19 '15 at 8:47






            • 7




              The first head command might be problematic. It will output the first 10 lines from /dev/urandom, which means it will stop once it has seen the 10th newline. So the length of the output send to the tr command is random. It is possible that there will be less than 13 characters in the output from tr. I haven't computed the probability of this happening, the calculations are a bit tricky.
              – kasperd
              Sep 19 '15 at 22:40






            • 4




              Better do it like this: <dev/urandom tr -dc "$charset" | head -c "$length"
              – PSkocik
              Sep 20 '15 at 13:06







            • 3




              +1 Here's a quick attempt to include the other characters from the OWASP password special characters page, escaped for bash command line: tr -dc A-Za-z0-9!"#$&'()*+,-./:\\;<=>?@^_`~
              – Rup
              Jul 28 '16 at 10:26






            • 2




              @Rup I'm not sure what's not working with your tr .. command but just quoting everything (except for the single quote) works – tr -dc 'A-Za-z0-9!"#$%&'''()*+,-./:;<=>?@[]^_`~'.
              – Kenny Evitt
              Aug 18 '16 at 19:33








            13




            13




            Or do this: head /dev/urandom | tr -dc A-Za-z0-9 | head -c10 - This way is more accurate. You get 10 characters that are capitals, lowers, or digits
            – Brandin
            Sep 19 '15 at 8:47




            Or do this: head /dev/urandom | tr -dc A-Za-z0-9 | head -c10 - This way is more accurate. You get 10 characters that are capitals, lowers, or digits
            – Brandin
            Sep 19 '15 at 8:47




            7




            7




            The first head command might be problematic. It will output the first 10 lines from /dev/urandom, which means it will stop once it has seen the 10th newline. So the length of the output send to the tr command is random. It is possible that there will be less than 13 characters in the output from tr. I haven't computed the probability of this happening, the calculations are a bit tricky.
            – kasperd
            Sep 19 '15 at 22:40




            The first head command might be problematic. It will output the first 10 lines from /dev/urandom, which means it will stop once it has seen the 10th newline. So the length of the output send to the tr command is random. It is possible that there will be less than 13 characters in the output from tr. I haven't computed the probability of this happening, the calculations are a bit tricky.
            – kasperd
            Sep 19 '15 at 22:40




            4




            4




            Better do it like this: <dev/urandom tr -dc "$charset" | head -c "$length"
            – PSkocik
            Sep 20 '15 at 13:06





            Better do it like this: <dev/urandom tr -dc "$charset" | head -c "$length"
            – PSkocik
            Sep 20 '15 at 13:06





            3




            3




            +1 Here's a quick attempt to include the other characters from the OWASP password special characters page, escaped for bash command line: tr -dc A-Za-z0-9!"#$&'()*+,-./:\\;<=>?@^_`~
            – Rup
            Jul 28 '16 at 10:26




            +1 Here's a quick attempt to include the other characters from the OWASP password special characters page, escaped for bash command line: tr -dc A-Za-z0-9!"#$&'()*+,-./:\\;<=>?@^_`~
            – Rup
            Jul 28 '16 at 10:26




            2




            2




            @Rup I'm not sure what's not working with your tr .. command but just quoting everything (except for the single quote) works – tr -dc 'A-Za-z0-9!"#$%&'''()*+,-./:;<=>?@[]^_`~'.
            – Kenny Evitt
            Aug 18 '16 at 19:33





            @Rup I'm not sure what's not working with your tr .. command but just quoting everything (except for the single quote) works – tr -dc 'A-Za-z0-9!"#$%&'''()*+,-./:;<=>?@[]^_`~'.
            – Kenny Evitt
            Aug 18 '16 at 19:33











            up vote
            69
            down vote













            I am using the openssl command, the swiss army knife of cryptography.



            openssl rand -base64 12


            or



            openssl rand -hex 12





            share|improve this answer


















            • 6




              rand -hex will limit the output to just 16 characters, rather than the 90+ on my keyboard. base64 is better because it's 64 characters, but it's not random (e.g. there are predictable padding patterns, and perhaps some characters appear more often than others).
              – Martin Tournoij
              Aug 27 '16 at 17:37











            • @Carpetsmoker: Note that the example openssl rand -base64 12 produces 16 characters of output (because 256 values are mapped to 64). And the hex example produces 24 characters. There's no loss in the case of the hex since it's a simple 1:2 mapping, but there might be a little in the base64 case since padding is used. The radix does not affect the randomness, it's the way one is mapped to another that does. (and the total bit count is much more important).
              – Dennis Williamson
              May 19 '17 at 20:29










            • The question was "How to generate a random string of a specific length" @DennisWilliamson, so while your comment is correct as such, it's not correct in the context of this question.
              – Martin Tournoij
              May 19 '17 at 20:31










            • @Carpetsmoker: In that case, neither is this answer.
              – Dennis Williamson
              May 19 '17 at 20:58






            • 1




              This answer deserves more upvotes. urandom, pwgen, gpw, etc may or may not be available on your system; also in different environments, a policy that works on one may not work on another. It would be a pretty dysfunctional setup to not have openssl. Even better: openssl rand -base64 32 | tr -d /=+ | cut -c -16 That'll give you 32 char minus non-alphanum's and trimmed to 16 char length. Makes it easy to deal with as an admin. Users only have alphanums (which they tend to appreciate). The length is long enough that the removal of special chars don't overly impact the entropy. Golden.
              – zentechinc
              Sep 5 '17 at 16:34














            up vote
            69
            down vote













            I am using the openssl command, the swiss army knife of cryptography.



            openssl rand -base64 12


            or



            openssl rand -hex 12





            share|improve this answer


















            • 6




              rand -hex will limit the output to just 16 characters, rather than the 90+ on my keyboard. base64 is better because it's 64 characters, but it's not random (e.g. there are predictable padding patterns, and perhaps some characters appear more often than others).
              – Martin Tournoij
              Aug 27 '16 at 17:37











            • @Carpetsmoker: Note that the example openssl rand -base64 12 produces 16 characters of output (because 256 values are mapped to 64). And the hex example produces 24 characters. There's no loss in the case of the hex since it's a simple 1:2 mapping, but there might be a little in the base64 case since padding is used. The radix does not affect the randomness, it's the way one is mapped to another that does. (and the total bit count is much more important).
              – Dennis Williamson
              May 19 '17 at 20:29










            • The question was "How to generate a random string of a specific length" @DennisWilliamson, so while your comment is correct as such, it's not correct in the context of this question.
              – Martin Tournoij
              May 19 '17 at 20:31










            • @Carpetsmoker: In that case, neither is this answer.
              – Dennis Williamson
              May 19 '17 at 20:58






            • 1




              This answer deserves more upvotes. urandom, pwgen, gpw, etc may or may not be available on your system; also in different environments, a policy that works on one may not work on another. It would be a pretty dysfunctional setup to not have openssl. Even better: openssl rand -base64 32 | tr -d /=+ | cut -c -16 That'll give you 32 char minus non-alphanum's and trimmed to 16 char length. Makes it easy to deal with as an admin. Users only have alphanums (which they tend to appreciate). The length is long enough that the removal of special chars don't overly impact the entropy. Golden.
              – zentechinc
              Sep 5 '17 at 16:34












            up vote
            69
            down vote










            up vote
            69
            down vote









            I am using the openssl command, the swiss army knife of cryptography.



            openssl rand -base64 12


            or



            openssl rand -hex 12





            share|improve this answer














            I am using the openssl command, the swiss army knife of cryptography.



            openssl rand -base64 12


            or



            openssl rand -hex 12






            share|improve this answer














            share|improve this answer



            share|improve this answer








            edited Aug 27 '16 at 17:29

























            answered Aug 27 '16 at 17:22









            400 the Cat

            647518




            647518







            • 6




              rand -hex will limit the output to just 16 characters, rather than the 90+ on my keyboard. base64 is better because it's 64 characters, but it's not random (e.g. there are predictable padding patterns, and perhaps some characters appear more often than others).
              – Martin Tournoij
              Aug 27 '16 at 17:37











            • @Carpetsmoker: Note that the example openssl rand -base64 12 produces 16 characters of output (because 256 values are mapped to 64). And the hex example produces 24 characters. There's no loss in the case of the hex since it's a simple 1:2 mapping, but there might be a little in the base64 case since padding is used. The radix does not affect the randomness, it's the way one is mapped to another that does. (and the total bit count is much more important).
              – Dennis Williamson
              May 19 '17 at 20:29










            • The question was "How to generate a random string of a specific length" @DennisWilliamson, so while your comment is correct as such, it's not correct in the context of this question.
              – Martin Tournoij
              May 19 '17 at 20:31










            • @Carpetsmoker: In that case, neither is this answer.
              – Dennis Williamson
              May 19 '17 at 20:58






            • 1




              This answer deserves more upvotes. urandom, pwgen, gpw, etc may or may not be available on your system; also in different environments, a policy that works on one may not work on another. It would be a pretty dysfunctional setup to not have openssl. Even better: openssl rand -base64 32 | tr -d /=+ | cut -c -16 That'll give you 32 char minus non-alphanum's and trimmed to 16 char length. Makes it easy to deal with as an admin. Users only have alphanums (which they tend to appreciate). The length is long enough that the removal of special chars don't overly impact the entropy. Golden.
              – zentechinc
              Sep 5 '17 at 16:34












            • 6




              rand -hex will limit the output to just 16 characters, rather than the 90+ on my keyboard. base64 is better because it's 64 characters, but it's not random (e.g. there are predictable padding patterns, and perhaps some characters appear more often than others).
              – Martin Tournoij
              Aug 27 '16 at 17:37











            • @Carpetsmoker: Note that the example openssl rand -base64 12 produces 16 characters of output (because 256 values are mapped to 64). And the hex example produces 24 characters. There's no loss in the case of the hex since it's a simple 1:2 mapping, but there might be a little in the base64 case since padding is used. The radix does not affect the randomness, it's the way one is mapped to another that does. (and the total bit count is much more important).
              – Dennis Williamson
              May 19 '17 at 20:29










            • The question was "How to generate a random string of a specific length" @DennisWilliamson, so while your comment is correct as such, it's not correct in the context of this question.
              – Martin Tournoij
              May 19 '17 at 20:31










            • @Carpetsmoker: In that case, neither is this answer.
              – Dennis Williamson
              May 19 '17 at 20:58






            • 1




              This answer deserves more upvotes. urandom, pwgen, gpw, etc may or may not be available on your system; also in different environments, a policy that works on one may not work on another. It would be a pretty dysfunctional setup to not have openssl. Even better: openssl rand -base64 32 | tr -d /=+ | cut -c -16 That'll give you 32 char minus non-alphanum's and trimmed to 16 char length. Makes it easy to deal with as an admin. Users only have alphanums (which they tend to appreciate). The length is long enough that the removal of special chars don't overly impact the entropy. Golden.
              – zentechinc
              Sep 5 '17 at 16:34







            6




            6




            rand -hex will limit the output to just 16 characters, rather than the 90+ on my keyboard. base64 is better because it's 64 characters, but it's not random (e.g. there are predictable padding patterns, and perhaps some characters appear more often than others).
            – Martin Tournoij
            Aug 27 '16 at 17:37





            rand -hex will limit the output to just 16 characters, rather than the 90+ on my keyboard. base64 is better because it's 64 characters, but it's not random (e.g. there are predictable padding patterns, and perhaps some characters appear more often than others).
            – Martin Tournoij
            Aug 27 '16 at 17:37













            @Carpetsmoker: Note that the example openssl rand -base64 12 produces 16 characters of output (because 256 values are mapped to 64). And the hex example produces 24 characters. There's no loss in the case of the hex since it's a simple 1:2 mapping, but there might be a little in the base64 case since padding is used. The radix does not affect the randomness, it's the way one is mapped to another that does. (and the total bit count is much more important).
            – Dennis Williamson
            May 19 '17 at 20:29




            @Carpetsmoker: Note that the example openssl rand -base64 12 produces 16 characters of output (because 256 values are mapped to 64). And the hex example produces 24 characters. There's no loss in the case of the hex since it's a simple 1:2 mapping, but there might be a little in the base64 case since padding is used. The radix does not affect the randomness, it's the way one is mapped to another that does. (and the total bit count is much more important).
            – Dennis Williamson
            May 19 '17 at 20:29












            The question was "How to generate a random string of a specific length" @DennisWilliamson, so while your comment is correct as such, it's not correct in the context of this question.
            – Martin Tournoij
            May 19 '17 at 20:31




            The question was "How to generate a random string of a specific length" @DennisWilliamson, so while your comment is correct as such, it's not correct in the context of this question.
            – Martin Tournoij
            May 19 '17 at 20:31












            @Carpetsmoker: In that case, neither is this answer.
            – Dennis Williamson
            May 19 '17 at 20:58




            @Carpetsmoker: In that case, neither is this answer.
            – Dennis Williamson
            May 19 '17 at 20:58




            1




            1




            This answer deserves more upvotes. urandom, pwgen, gpw, etc may or may not be available on your system; also in different environments, a policy that works on one may not work on another. It would be a pretty dysfunctional setup to not have openssl. Even better: openssl rand -base64 32 | tr -d /=+ | cut -c -16 That'll give you 32 char minus non-alphanum's and trimmed to 16 char length. Makes it easy to deal with as an admin. Users only have alphanums (which they tend to appreciate). The length is long enough that the removal of special chars don't overly impact the entropy. Golden.
            – zentechinc
            Sep 5 '17 at 16:34




            This answer deserves more upvotes. urandom, pwgen, gpw, etc may or may not be available on your system; also in different environments, a policy that works on one may not work on another. It would be a pretty dysfunctional setup to not have openssl. Even better: openssl rand -base64 32 | tr -d /=+ | cut -c -16 That'll give you 32 char minus non-alphanum's and trimmed to 16 char length. Makes it easy to deal with as an admin. Users only have alphanums (which they tend to appreciate). The length is long enough that the removal of special chars don't overly impact the entropy. Golden.
            – zentechinc
            Sep 5 '17 at 16:34










            up vote
            11
            down vote













            Here is how, I do it. It generates 10 characters random string. You can optimize it by replacing the "fold", with other string processing tools.



            cat /dev/urandom | tr -dc 'a-zA-Z0-9' | fold -w 10 | head -n 1





            share|improve this answer
















            • 1




              +1 I like this approach, thanks. Allows to control both length and number of generated strings.
              – landroni
              Sep 20 '15 at 6:12







            • 3




              Achievement unlocked: Unnecessary use of cat!
              – user1338062
              Oct 25 '16 at 9:26










            • @user1338062 An unhelpful comment. OP presumably isn't running on a PDP-10 and can afford to waste the whole circa 4KB of RAM on running cat. Lots of people have explained (again and again since the mid 1980s) why they find the bash one-liner style using cat easier to read and edit.
              – jwg
              May 16 at 15:04















            up vote
            11
            down vote













            Here is how, I do it. It generates 10 characters random string. You can optimize it by replacing the "fold", with other string processing tools.



            cat /dev/urandom | tr -dc 'a-zA-Z0-9' | fold -w 10 | head -n 1





            share|improve this answer
















            • 1




              +1 I like this approach, thanks. Allows to control both length and number of generated strings.
              – landroni
              Sep 20 '15 at 6:12







            • 3




              Achievement unlocked: Unnecessary use of cat!
              – user1338062
              Oct 25 '16 at 9:26










            • @user1338062 An unhelpful comment. OP presumably isn't running on a PDP-10 and can afford to waste the whole circa 4KB of RAM on running cat. Lots of people have explained (again and again since the mid 1980s) why they find the bash one-liner style using cat easier to read and edit.
              – jwg
              May 16 at 15:04













            up vote
            11
            down vote










            up vote
            11
            down vote









            Here is how, I do it. It generates 10 characters random string. You can optimize it by replacing the "fold", with other string processing tools.



            cat /dev/urandom | tr -dc 'a-zA-Z0-9' | fold -w 10 | head -n 1





            share|improve this answer












            Here is how, I do it. It generates 10 characters random string. You can optimize it by replacing the "fold", with other string processing tools.



            cat /dev/urandom | tr -dc 'a-zA-Z0-9' | fold -w 10 | head -n 1






            share|improve this answer












            share|improve this answer



            share|improve this answer










            answered Sep 20 '15 at 0:16









            x1b2j

            33413




            33413







            • 1




              +1 I like this approach, thanks. Allows to control both length and number of generated strings.
              – landroni
              Sep 20 '15 at 6:12







            • 3




              Achievement unlocked: Unnecessary use of cat!
              – user1338062
              Oct 25 '16 at 9:26










            • @user1338062 An unhelpful comment. OP presumably isn't running on a PDP-10 and can afford to waste the whole circa 4KB of RAM on running cat. Lots of people have explained (again and again since the mid 1980s) why they find the bash one-liner style using cat easier to read and edit.
              – jwg
              May 16 at 15:04













            • 1




              +1 I like this approach, thanks. Allows to control both length and number of generated strings.
              – landroni
              Sep 20 '15 at 6:12







            • 3




              Achievement unlocked: Unnecessary use of cat!
              – user1338062
              Oct 25 '16 at 9:26










            • @user1338062 An unhelpful comment. OP presumably isn't running on a PDP-10 and can afford to waste the whole circa 4KB of RAM on running cat. Lots of people have explained (again and again since the mid 1980s) why they find the bash one-liner style using cat easier to read and edit.
              – jwg
              May 16 at 15:04








            1




            1




            +1 I like this approach, thanks. Allows to control both length and number of generated strings.
            – landroni
            Sep 20 '15 at 6:12





            +1 I like this approach, thanks. Allows to control both length and number of generated strings.
            – landroni
            Sep 20 '15 at 6:12





            3




            3




            Achievement unlocked: Unnecessary use of cat!
            – user1338062
            Oct 25 '16 at 9:26




            Achievement unlocked: Unnecessary use of cat!
            – user1338062
            Oct 25 '16 at 9:26












            @user1338062 An unhelpful comment. OP presumably isn't running on a PDP-10 and can afford to waste the whole circa 4KB of RAM on running cat. Lots of people have explained (again and again since the mid 1980s) why they find the bash one-liner style using cat easier to read and edit.
            – jwg
            May 16 at 15:04





            @user1338062 An unhelpful comment. OP presumably isn't running on a PDP-10 and can afford to waste the whole circa 4KB of RAM on running cat. Lots of people have explained (again and again since the mid 1980s) why they find the bash one-liner style using cat easier to read and edit.
            – jwg
            May 16 at 15:04











            up vote
            10
            down vote













            To generate password with the highest entropy possible with standard Linux tools that are built into every distribution I use:



            < /dev/urandom tr -cd "[:print:]" | head -c 32; echo


            This outputs all of the ASCII printable characters - from 32 (space) to 126 (tilde, ~). The password length can be controlled with the head's -c flag. There are also other possible character sets in tr (to not include the space, just characters 33-126, use [:graph:]).






            share|improve this answer
















            • 1




              In what way is this different from the existing answers? Specifically, herbert's comes to mind.
              – Fox
              Apr 27 '17 at 22:40







            • 3




              @Fox His solution uses hardcoded list of characters, which is not an encouraged programming practice because of code readability, compactness and cleanliness. Also some of the special printable ASCII characters could be interpreted by bash, not to mention the most obvious drawback of his one liner - if maximum entropy is desired, can one be sure that all of the available characters are included in the list? And that there are no duplicates which could possibly alter the tr's behaviour? His answer should be replaced by mine since you asked :)
              – drws
              Apr 29 '17 at 13:37






            • 2




              Many if not most web sites have restrictions on the characters that can be in a password, so hard-coding '[:print:]' doesn't feel any better to me than hard-coding the OWASP password special character list. I feel that almost every answer here could be improved by using a variable, but that is such a minor change that I'd only suggest an edit
              – Fox
              Apr 29 '17 at 13:54










            • < /dev/urandom tr -cd '[:graph:]'| tr -d '\' | head -c 32; echo if you dont want ` characters in generated string. ` because is an escape character in many languages causes problems
              – mzzzzb
              Mar 8 at 14:36














            up vote
            10
            down vote













            To generate password with the highest entropy possible with standard Linux tools that are built into every distribution I use:



            < /dev/urandom tr -cd "[:print:]" | head -c 32; echo


            This outputs all of the ASCII printable characters - from 32 (space) to 126 (tilde, ~). The password length can be controlled with the head's -c flag. There are also other possible character sets in tr (to not include the space, just characters 33-126, use [:graph:]).






            share|improve this answer
















            • 1




              In what way is this different from the existing answers? Specifically, herbert's comes to mind.
              – Fox
              Apr 27 '17 at 22:40







            • 3




              @Fox His solution uses hardcoded list of characters, which is not an encouraged programming practice because of code readability, compactness and cleanliness. Also some of the special printable ASCII characters could be interpreted by bash, not to mention the most obvious drawback of his one liner - if maximum entropy is desired, can one be sure that all of the available characters are included in the list? And that there are no duplicates which could possibly alter the tr's behaviour? His answer should be replaced by mine since you asked :)
              – drws
              Apr 29 '17 at 13:37






            • 2




              Many if not most web sites have restrictions on the characters that can be in a password, so hard-coding '[:print:]' doesn't feel any better to me than hard-coding the OWASP password special character list. I feel that almost every answer here could be improved by using a variable, but that is such a minor change that I'd only suggest an edit
              – Fox
              Apr 29 '17 at 13:54










            • < /dev/urandom tr -cd '[:graph:]'| tr -d '\' | head -c 32; echo if you dont want ` characters in generated string. ` because is an escape character in many languages causes problems
              – mzzzzb
              Mar 8 at 14:36












            up vote
            10
            down vote










            up vote
            10
            down vote









            To generate password with the highest entropy possible with standard Linux tools that are built into every distribution I use:



            < /dev/urandom tr -cd "[:print:]" | head -c 32; echo


            This outputs all of the ASCII printable characters - from 32 (space) to 126 (tilde, ~). The password length can be controlled with the head's -c flag. There are also other possible character sets in tr (to not include the space, just characters 33-126, use [:graph:]).






            share|improve this answer












            To generate password with the highest entropy possible with standard Linux tools that are built into every distribution I use:



            < /dev/urandom tr -cd "[:print:]" | head -c 32; echo


            This outputs all of the ASCII printable characters - from 32 (space) to 126 (tilde, ~). The password length can be controlled with the head's -c flag. There are also other possible character sets in tr (to not include the space, just characters 33-126, use [:graph:]).







            share|improve this answer












            share|improve this answer



            share|improve this answer










            answered Apr 27 '17 at 22:24









            drws

            10113




            10113







            • 1




              In what way is this different from the existing answers? Specifically, herbert's comes to mind.
              – Fox
              Apr 27 '17 at 22:40







            • 3




              @Fox His solution uses hardcoded list of characters, which is not an encouraged programming practice because of code readability, compactness and cleanliness. Also some of the special printable ASCII characters could be interpreted by bash, not to mention the most obvious drawback of his one liner - if maximum entropy is desired, can one be sure that all of the available characters are included in the list? And that there are no duplicates which could possibly alter the tr's behaviour? His answer should be replaced by mine since you asked :)
              – drws
              Apr 29 '17 at 13:37






            • 2




              Many if not most web sites have restrictions on the characters that can be in a password, so hard-coding '[:print:]' doesn't feel any better to me than hard-coding the OWASP password special character list. I feel that almost every answer here could be improved by using a variable, but that is such a minor change that I'd only suggest an edit
              – Fox
              Apr 29 '17 at 13:54










            • < /dev/urandom tr -cd '[:graph:]'| tr -d '\' | head -c 32; echo if you dont want ` characters in generated string. ` because is an escape character in many languages causes problems
              – mzzzzb
              Mar 8 at 14:36












            • 1




              In what way is this different from the existing answers? Specifically, herbert's comes to mind.
              – Fox
              Apr 27 '17 at 22:40







            • 3




              @Fox His solution uses hardcoded list of characters, which is not an encouraged programming practice because of code readability, compactness and cleanliness. Also some of the special printable ASCII characters could be interpreted by bash, not to mention the most obvious drawback of his one liner - if maximum entropy is desired, can one be sure that all of the available characters are included in the list? And that there are no duplicates which could possibly alter the tr's behaviour? His answer should be replaced by mine since you asked :)
              – drws
              Apr 29 '17 at 13:37






            • 2




              Many if not most web sites have restrictions on the characters that can be in a password, so hard-coding '[:print:]' doesn't feel any better to me than hard-coding the OWASP password special character list. I feel that almost every answer here could be improved by using a variable, but that is such a minor change that I'd only suggest an edit
              – Fox
              Apr 29 '17 at 13:54










            • < /dev/urandom tr -cd '[:graph:]'| tr -d '\' | head -c 32; echo if you dont want ` characters in generated string. ` because is an escape character in many languages causes problems
              – mzzzzb
              Mar 8 at 14:36







            1




            1




            In what way is this different from the existing answers? Specifically, herbert's comes to mind.
            – Fox
            Apr 27 '17 at 22:40





            In what way is this different from the existing answers? Specifically, herbert's comes to mind.
            – Fox
            Apr 27 '17 at 22:40





            3




            3




            @Fox His solution uses hardcoded list of characters, which is not an encouraged programming practice because of code readability, compactness and cleanliness. Also some of the special printable ASCII characters could be interpreted by bash, not to mention the most obvious drawback of his one liner - if maximum entropy is desired, can one be sure that all of the available characters are included in the list? And that there are no duplicates which could possibly alter the tr's behaviour? His answer should be replaced by mine since you asked :)
            – drws
            Apr 29 '17 at 13:37




            @Fox His solution uses hardcoded list of characters, which is not an encouraged programming practice because of code readability, compactness and cleanliness. Also some of the special printable ASCII characters could be interpreted by bash, not to mention the most obvious drawback of his one liner - if maximum entropy is desired, can one be sure that all of the available characters are included in the list? And that there are no duplicates which could possibly alter the tr's behaviour? His answer should be replaced by mine since you asked :)
            – drws
            Apr 29 '17 at 13:37




            2




            2




            Many if not most web sites have restrictions on the characters that can be in a password, so hard-coding '[:print:]' doesn't feel any better to me than hard-coding the OWASP password special character list. I feel that almost every answer here could be improved by using a variable, but that is such a minor change that I'd only suggest an edit
            – Fox
            Apr 29 '17 at 13:54




            Many if not most web sites have restrictions on the characters that can be in a password, so hard-coding '[:print:]' doesn't feel any better to me than hard-coding the OWASP password special character list. I feel that almost every answer here could be improved by using a variable, but that is such a minor change that I'd only suggest an edit
            – Fox
            Apr 29 '17 at 13:54












            < /dev/urandom tr -cd '[:graph:]'| tr -d '\' | head -c 32; echo if you dont want ` characters in generated string. ` because is an escape character in many languages causes problems
            – mzzzzb
            Mar 8 at 14:36




            < /dev/urandom tr -cd '[:graph:]'| tr -d '\' | head -c 32; echo if you dont want ` characters in generated string. ` because is an escape character in many languages causes problems
            – mzzzzb
            Mar 8 at 14:36










            up vote
            7
            down vote













            Depending on the level of randomness you want, you could simply go with bash's (also zsh and ksh, possibly others) builtin $RANDOM variable:



            $ echo $RANDOM | tr '[0-9]' '[a-zA-Z]'
            bfeci
            $ echo $RANDOM | tr '[0-9]' '[a-zA-Z]'
            cijjj


            The methods reading directly from /dev/urandom are far simpler, but for the sake of completion, you could also use $RANDOM:



            echo $(for((i=1;i<=13;i++)); do printf '%s' "$RANDOM:0:1"; done) | tr '[0-9]' '[a-zA-Z]'





            share|improve this answer






















            • How do you control the length of the generated string?
              – landroni
              Sep 19 '15 at 13:33










            • @landroni I don't think you can short of using a loop until you get the right length. $RANDOM will print a number between 0 and 32767.
              – terdon♦
              Sep 19 '15 at 13:36










            • I've tried running the command some 20 times, and I can never get anything longer than 4-5 chars...
              – landroni
              Sep 19 '15 at 13:38










            • @landroni yes, that's what I said, it generates numbers between 0 and 32767, so 5 digits will be the max. If you need longer ones or need to be able to specify the length, please edit your question and make that clear.
              – terdon♦
              Sep 19 '15 at 14:20







            • 2




              @landroni thanks, I've added a way to specify length but it's not very good. I'd just use something like rand=$(head -c 100 /dev/urandom | tr -dc A-Za-z0-9 | head -c13) instead.
              – terdon♦
              Sep 19 '15 at 16:12














            up vote
            7
            down vote













            Depending on the level of randomness you want, you could simply go with bash's (also zsh and ksh, possibly others) builtin $RANDOM variable:



            $ echo $RANDOM | tr '[0-9]' '[a-zA-Z]'
            bfeci
            $ echo $RANDOM | tr '[0-9]' '[a-zA-Z]'
            cijjj


            The methods reading directly from /dev/urandom are far simpler, but for the sake of completion, you could also use $RANDOM:



            echo $(for((i=1;i<=13;i++)); do printf '%s' "$RANDOM:0:1"; done) | tr '[0-9]' '[a-zA-Z]'





            share|improve this answer






















            • How do you control the length of the generated string?
              – landroni
              Sep 19 '15 at 13:33










            • @landroni I don't think you can short of using a loop until you get the right length. $RANDOM will print a number between 0 and 32767.
              – terdon♦
              Sep 19 '15 at 13:36










            • I've tried running the command some 20 times, and I can never get anything longer than 4-5 chars...
              – landroni
              Sep 19 '15 at 13:38










            • @landroni yes, that's what I said, it generates numbers between 0 and 32767, so 5 digits will be the max. If you need longer ones or need to be able to specify the length, please edit your question and make that clear.
              – terdon♦
              Sep 19 '15 at 14:20







            • 2




              @landroni thanks, I've added a way to specify length but it's not very good. I'd just use something like rand=$(head -c 100 /dev/urandom | tr -dc A-Za-z0-9 | head -c13) instead.
              – terdon♦
              Sep 19 '15 at 16:12












            up vote
            7
            down vote










            up vote
            7
            down vote









            Depending on the level of randomness you want, you could simply go with bash's (also zsh and ksh, possibly others) builtin $RANDOM variable:



            $ echo $RANDOM | tr '[0-9]' '[a-zA-Z]'
            bfeci
            $ echo $RANDOM | tr '[0-9]' '[a-zA-Z]'
            cijjj


            The methods reading directly from /dev/urandom are far simpler, but for the sake of completion, you could also use $RANDOM:



            echo $(for((i=1;i<=13;i++)); do printf '%s' "$RANDOM:0:1"; done) | tr '[0-9]' '[a-zA-Z]'





            share|improve this answer














            Depending on the level of randomness you want, you could simply go with bash's (also zsh and ksh, possibly others) builtin $RANDOM variable:



            $ echo $RANDOM | tr '[0-9]' '[a-zA-Z]'
            bfeci
            $ echo $RANDOM | tr '[0-9]' '[a-zA-Z]'
            cijjj


            The methods reading directly from /dev/urandom are far simpler, but for the sake of completion, you could also use $RANDOM:



            echo $(for((i=1;i<=13;i++)); do printf '%s' "$RANDOM:0:1"; done) | tr '[0-9]' '[a-zA-Z]'






            share|improve this answer














            share|improve this answer



            share|improve this answer








            edited Sep 19 '15 at 16:09

























            answered Sep 19 '15 at 13:08









            terdon♦

            124k29236414




            124k29236414











            • How do you control the length of the generated string?
              – landroni
              Sep 19 '15 at 13:33










            • @landroni I don't think you can short of using a loop until you get the right length. $RANDOM will print a number between 0 and 32767.
              – terdon♦
              Sep 19 '15 at 13:36










            • I've tried running the command some 20 times, and I can never get anything longer than 4-5 chars...
              – landroni
              Sep 19 '15 at 13:38










            • @landroni yes, that's what I said, it generates numbers between 0 and 32767, so 5 digits will be the max. If you need longer ones or need to be able to specify the length, please edit your question and make that clear.
              – terdon♦
              Sep 19 '15 at 14:20







            • 2




              @landroni thanks, I've added a way to specify length but it's not very good. I'd just use something like rand=$(head -c 100 /dev/urandom | tr -dc A-Za-z0-9 | head -c13) instead.
              – terdon♦
              Sep 19 '15 at 16:12
















            • How do you control the length of the generated string?
              – landroni
              Sep 19 '15 at 13:33










            • @landroni I don't think you can short of using a loop until you get the right length. $RANDOM will print a number between 0 and 32767.
              – terdon♦
              Sep 19 '15 at 13:36










            • I've tried running the command some 20 times, and I can never get anything longer than 4-5 chars...
              – landroni
              Sep 19 '15 at 13:38










            • @landroni yes, that's what I said, it generates numbers between 0 and 32767, so 5 digits will be the max. If you need longer ones or need to be able to specify the length, please edit your question and make that clear.
              – terdon♦
              Sep 19 '15 at 14:20







            • 2




              @landroni thanks, I've added a way to specify length but it's not very good. I'd just use something like rand=$(head -c 100 /dev/urandom | tr -dc A-Za-z0-9 | head -c13) instead.
              – terdon♦
              Sep 19 '15 at 16:12















            How do you control the length of the generated string?
            – landroni
            Sep 19 '15 at 13:33




            How do you control the length of the generated string?
            – landroni
            Sep 19 '15 at 13:33












            @landroni I don't think you can short of using a loop until you get the right length. $RANDOM will print a number between 0 and 32767.
            – terdon♦
            Sep 19 '15 at 13:36




            @landroni I don't think you can short of using a loop until you get the right length. $RANDOM will print a number between 0 and 32767.
            – terdon♦
            Sep 19 '15 at 13:36












            I've tried running the command some 20 times, and I can never get anything longer than 4-5 chars...
            – landroni
            Sep 19 '15 at 13:38




            I've tried running the command some 20 times, and I can never get anything longer than 4-5 chars...
            – landroni
            Sep 19 '15 at 13:38












            @landroni yes, that's what I said, it generates numbers between 0 and 32767, so 5 digits will be the max. If you need longer ones or need to be able to specify the length, please edit your question and make that clear.
            – terdon♦
            Sep 19 '15 at 14:20





            @landroni yes, that's what I said, it generates numbers between 0 and 32767, so 5 digits will be the max. If you need longer ones or need to be able to specify the length, please edit your question and make that clear.
            – terdon♦
            Sep 19 '15 at 14:20





            2




            2




            @landroni thanks, I've added a way to specify length but it's not very good. I'd just use something like rand=$(head -c 100 /dev/urandom | tr -dc A-Za-z0-9 | head -c13) instead.
            – terdon♦
            Sep 19 '15 at 16:12




            @landroni thanks, I've added a way to specify length but it's not very good. I'd just use something like rand=$(head -c 100 /dev/urandom | tr -dc A-Za-z0-9 | head -c13) instead.
            – terdon♦
            Sep 19 '15 at 16:12










            up vote
            5
            down vote













            @Brandin explained in a comment to another answer how to get at most 100 bytes from /dev/urandom using head -c 100. Another way to do this is with dd:



            tr -dc A-Za-z0-9 < /dev/urandom | dd bs=100 count=1 2>/dev/null


            The 2>/dev/null at the end of the dd command is to suppress the "... records in / ... records out" output.



            I'm not aware of any substantial advantages/disadvantages between these two methods.



            I had an issue with both methods of tr complaining about the input. I thought this was because it didn't like receiving binary input, and hence suggested first filtering /dev/random with iconv -c -t US. However, Gilles suggested a different diagnosis and solution, which works for me:



            LC_ALL=C tr -dc A-Za-z0-9 </dev/urandom | dd bs=100 count=1 2>/dev/null





            share|improve this answer






















            • For some reason the iconv solution maxes one CPU core and doesn't yield an output (I waited some 10s before killing it)...
              – landroni
              Sep 19 '15 at 9:38










            • On my Ubuntu 14.04 system iconv is provided by libc-bin 2.19. I'm not sure if it's the same iconv...
              – landroni
              Sep 19 '15 at 13:36










            • tr supports binary input. However a range like A-Z may be influenced by locale settings. Try LC_ALL=C tr …
              – Gilles
              Sep 19 '15 at 20:27










            • @Gilles According to the POSIX spec it doesn't "support binary input". Only GNU tr does because it doesn't support multibyte at all (e.g. last time I checked it changing case was implemented by simply setting the sixth bit of every byte). Other systems (e.g. BSD) do support multibyte and this will fail there since the chance that a random input stream is also a valid multibyte stream is very small in most encodings. GNU may add multibyte support at any given moment, at which point this will fail. Of course, setting LC_ALL=C will fix that.
              – Martin Tournoij
              Aug 27 '16 at 17:33










            • @Carpetsmoker POSIX does require tr to process binary input (in the C locale). (Well, ok, it only says explicitly that null bytes are to be supported, it doesn't say that non-empty files not ending with a newline character are to be supported, but in practice that's always the case as well.)
              – Gilles
              Aug 27 '16 at 17:57














            up vote
            5
            down vote













            @Brandin explained in a comment to another answer how to get at most 100 bytes from /dev/urandom using head -c 100. Another way to do this is with dd:



            tr -dc A-Za-z0-9 < /dev/urandom | dd bs=100 count=1 2>/dev/null


            The 2>/dev/null at the end of the dd command is to suppress the "... records in / ... records out" output.



            I'm not aware of any substantial advantages/disadvantages between these two methods.



            I had an issue with both methods of tr complaining about the input. I thought this was because it didn't like receiving binary input, and hence suggested first filtering /dev/random with iconv -c -t US. However, Gilles suggested a different diagnosis and solution, which works for me:



            LC_ALL=C tr -dc A-Za-z0-9 </dev/urandom | dd bs=100 count=1 2>/dev/null





            share|improve this answer






















            • For some reason the iconv solution maxes one CPU core and doesn't yield an output (I waited some 10s before killing it)...
              – landroni
              Sep 19 '15 at 9:38










            • On my Ubuntu 14.04 system iconv is provided by libc-bin 2.19. I'm not sure if it's the same iconv...
              – landroni
              Sep 19 '15 at 13:36










            • tr supports binary input. However a range like A-Z may be influenced by locale settings. Try LC_ALL=C tr …
              – Gilles
              Sep 19 '15 at 20:27










            • @Gilles According to the POSIX spec it doesn't "support binary input". Only GNU tr does because it doesn't support multibyte at all (e.g. last time I checked it changing case was implemented by simply setting the sixth bit of every byte). Other systems (e.g. BSD) do support multibyte and this will fail there since the chance that a random input stream is also a valid multibyte stream is very small in most encodings. GNU may add multibyte support at any given moment, at which point this will fail. Of course, setting LC_ALL=C will fix that.
              – Martin Tournoij
              Aug 27 '16 at 17:33










            • @Carpetsmoker POSIX does require tr to process binary input (in the C locale). (Well, ok, it only says explicitly that null bytes are to be supported, it doesn't say that non-empty files not ending with a newline character are to be supported, but in practice that's always the case as well.)
              – Gilles
              Aug 27 '16 at 17:57












            up vote
            5
            down vote










            up vote
            5
            down vote









            @Brandin explained in a comment to another answer how to get at most 100 bytes from /dev/urandom using head -c 100. Another way to do this is with dd:



            tr -dc A-Za-z0-9 < /dev/urandom | dd bs=100 count=1 2>/dev/null


            The 2>/dev/null at the end of the dd command is to suppress the "... records in / ... records out" output.



            I'm not aware of any substantial advantages/disadvantages between these two methods.



            I had an issue with both methods of tr complaining about the input. I thought this was because it didn't like receiving binary input, and hence suggested first filtering /dev/random with iconv -c -t US. However, Gilles suggested a different diagnosis and solution, which works for me:



            LC_ALL=C tr -dc A-Za-z0-9 </dev/urandom | dd bs=100 count=1 2>/dev/null





            share|improve this answer














            @Brandin explained in a comment to another answer how to get at most 100 bytes from /dev/urandom using head -c 100. Another way to do this is with dd:



            tr -dc A-Za-z0-9 < /dev/urandom | dd bs=100 count=1 2>/dev/null


            The 2>/dev/null at the end of the dd command is to suppress the "... records in / ... records out" output.



            I'm not aware of any substantial advantages/disadvantages between these two methods.



            I had an issue with both methods of tr complaining about the input. I thought this was because it didn't like receiving binary input, and hence suggested first filtering /dev/random with iconv -c -t US. However, Gilles suggested a different diagnosis and solution, which works for me:



            LC_ALL=C tr -dc A-Za-z0-9 </dev/urandom | dd bs=100 count=1 2>/dev/null






            share|improve this answer














            share|improve this answer



            share|improve this answer








            edited Sep 20 '15 at 12:54

























            answered Sep 19 '15 at 9:18









            dubiousjim

            1,9581223




            1,9581223











            • For some reason the iconv solution maxes one CPU core and doesn't yield an output (I waited some 10s before killing it)...
              – landroni
              Sep 19 '15 at 9:38










            • On my Ubuntu 14.04 system iconv is provided by libc-bin 2.19. I'm not sure if it's the same iconv...
              – landroni
              Sep 19 '15 at 13:36










            • tr supports binary input. However a range like A-Z may be influenced by locale settings. Try LC_ALL=C tr …
              – Gilles
              Sep 19 '15 at 20:27










            • @Gilles According to the POSIX spec it doesn't "support binary input". Only GNU tr does because it doesn't support multibyte at all (e.g. last time I checked it changing case was implemented by simply setting the sixth bit of every byte). Other systems (e.g. BSD) do support multibyte and this will fail there since the chance that a random input stream is also a valid multibyte stream is very small in most encodings. GNU may add multibyte support at any given moment, at which point this will fail. Of course, setting LC_ALL=C will fix that.
              – Martin Tournoij
              Aug 27 '16 at 17:33










            • @Carpetsmoker POSIX does require tr to process binary input (in the C locale). (Well, ok, it only says explicitly that null bytes are to be supported, it doesn't say that non-empty files not ending with a newline character are to be supported, but in practice that's always the case as well.)
              – Gilles
              Aug 27 '16 at 17:57
















            • For some reason the iconv solution maxes one CPU core and doesn't yield an output (I waited some 10s before killing it)...
              – landroni
              Sep 19 '15 at 9:38










            • On my Ubuntu 14.04 system iconv is provided by libc-bin 2.19. I'm not sure if it's the same iconv...
              – landroni
              Sep 19 '15 at 13:36










            • tr supports binary input. However a range like A-Z may be influenced by locale settings. Try LC_ALL=C tr …
              – Gilles
              Sep 19 '15 at 20:27










            • @Gilles According to the POSIX spec it doesn't "support binary input". Only GNU tr does because it doesn't support multibyte at all (e.g. last time I checked it changing case was implemented by simply setting the sixth bit of every byte). Other systems (e.g. BSD) do support multibyte and this will fail there since the chance that a random input stream is also a valid multibyte stream is very small in most encodings. GNU may add multibyte support at any given moment, at which point this will fail. Of course, setting LC_ALL=C will fix that.
              – Martin Tournoij
              Aug 27 '16 at 17:33










            • @Carpetsmoker POSIX does require tr to process binary input (in the C locale). (Well, ok, it only says explicitly that null bytes are to be supported, it doesn't say that non-empty files not ending with a newline character are to be supported, but in practice that's always the case as well.)
              – Gilles
              Aug 27 '16 at 17:57















            For some reason the iconv solution maxes one CPU core and doesn't yield an output (I waited some 10s before killing it)...
            – landroni
            Sep 19 '15 at 9:38




            For some reason the iconv solution maxes one CPU core and doesn't yield an output (I waited some 10s before killing it)...
            – landroni
            Sep 19 '15 at 9:38












            On my Ubuntu 14.04 system iconv is provided by libc-bin 2.19. I'm not sure if it's the same iconv...
            – landroni
            Sep 19 '15 at 13:36




            On my Ubuntu 14.04 system iconv is provided by libc-bin 2.19. I'm not sure if it's the same iconv...
            – landroni
            Sep 19 '15 at 13:36












            tr supports binary input. However a range like A-Z may be influenced by locale settings. Try LC_ALL=C tr …
            – Gilles
            Sep 19 '15 at 20:27




            tr supports binary input. However a range like A-Z may be influenced by locale settings. Try LC_ALL=C tr …
            – Gilles
            Sep 19 '15 at 20:27












            @Gilles According to the POSIX spec it doesn't "support binary input". Only GNU tr does because it doesn't support multibyte at all (e.g. last time I checked it changing case was implemented by simply setting the sixth bit of every byte). Other systems (e.g. BSD) do support multibyte and this will fail there since the chance that a random input stream is also a valid multibyte stream is very small in most encodings. GNU may add multibyte support at any given moment, at which point this will fail. Of course, setting LC_ALL=C will fix that.
            – Martin Tournoij
            Aug 27 '16 at 17:33




            @Gilles According to the POSIX spec it doesn't "support binary input". Only GNU tr does because it doesn't support multibyte at all (e.g. last time I checked it changing case was implemented by simply setting the sixth bit of every byte). Other systems (e.g. BSD) do support multibyte and this will fail there since the chance that a random input stream is also a valid multibyte stream is very small in most encodings. GNU may add multibyte support at any given moment, at which point this will fail. Of course, setting LC_ALL=C will fix that.
            – Martin Tournoij
            Aug 27 '16 at 17:33












            @Carpetsmoker POSIX does require tr to process binary input (in the C locale). (Well, ok, it only says explicitly that null bytes are to be supported, it doesn't say that non-empty files not ending with a newline character are to be supported, but in practice that's always the case as well.)
            – Gilles
            Aug 27 '16 at 17:57




            @Carpetsmoker POSIX does require tr to process binary input (in the C locale). (Well, ok, it only says explicitly that null bytes are to be supported, it doesn't say that non-empty files not ending with a newline character are to be supported, but in practice that's always the case as well.)
            – Gilles
            Aug 27 '16 at 17:57










            up vote
            3
            down vote













            You can use one of md5 tools that has precisely this purpose. In the case of creating a completely random password you can use the md5pass. It is a very simple tool to use and very helpful, since you can use "normal text" together with a "salt" to jump-bit construction of the same password that you can recover afterwards, or alternatively you may want to get a completely random password all the time. The general usage is:



            md5pass [password] [salt]


            where password is a chosen word that will be used for the construction of the random string and salt is the jump in bytes to be used. Like this:



            md5pass word

            $1$.MUittVW$j.XDTF1QRnxqFdXRUiSLs0


            This will create a "a random sequence" password for you to use. If you use no salt, then you may not be able to recreate this same string afterwards.



            However if you use a salt like this:



            md5pass word 512

            $1$512$.0jcLPQ83jgszaPT8xzds0


            then you can create a sequence which you can recover if you use the word in conjunction with the same salt (or jump) if it was originally defined.






            share|improve this answer






















            • When a salt is being used, this sounds similar to the PasswordMaker approach...
              – landroni
              Sep 26 '15 at 8:20











            • -Yes May sound similar to one maker password, but the difference is that it is not a commercial program or anything, because the set of md5 tools, "md5pass, md5sum, md5sum.textutils" dealt with here are concerned and are available the system at no cost some !!!
              – Paulo Maia
              Sep 26 '15 at 13:17










            • I actually had in mind PasswordMaker, which is also open-source and non-commercial.
              – landroni
              Sep 26 '15 at 16:43















            up vote
            3
            down vote













            You can use one of md5 tools that has precisely this purpose. In the case of creating a completely random password you can use the md5pass. It is a very simple tool to use and very helpful, since you can use "normal text" together with a "salt" to jump-bit construction of the same password that you can recover afterwards, or alternatively you may want to get a completely random password all the time. The general usage is:



            md5pass [password] [salt]


            where password is a chosen word that will be used for the construction of the random string and salt is the jump in bytes to be used. Like this:



            md5pass word

            $1$.MUittVW$j.XDTF1QRnxqFdXRUiSLs0


            This will create a "a random sequence" password for you to use. If you use no salt, then you may not be able to recreate this same string afterwards.



            However if you use a salt like this:



            md5pass word 512

            $1$512$.0jcLPQ83jgszaPT8xzds0


            then you can create a sequence which you can recover if you use the word in conjunction with the same salt (or jump) if it was originally defined.






            share|improve this answer






















            • When a salt is being used, this sounds similar to the PasswordMaker approach...
              – landroni
              Sep 26 '15 at 8:20











            • -Yes May sound similar to one maker password, but the difference is that it is not a commercial program or anything, because the set of md5 tools, "md5pass, md5sum, md5sum.textutils" dealt with here are concerned and are available the system at no cost some !!!
              – Paulo Maia
              Sep 26 '15 at 13:17










            • I actually had in mind PasswordMaker, which is also open-source and non-commercial.
              – landroni
              Sep 26 '15 at 16:43













            up vote
            3
            down vote










            up vote
            3
            down vote









            You can use one of md5 tools that has precisely this purpose. In the case of creating a completely random password you can use the md5pass. It is a very simple tool to use and very helpful, since you can use "normal text" together with a "salt" to jump-bit construction of the same password that you can recover afterwards, or alternatively you may want to get a completely random password all the time. The general usage is:



            md5pass [password] [salt]


            where password is a chosen word that will be used for the construction of the random string and salt is the jump in bytes to be used. Like this:



            md5pass word

            $1$.MUittVW$j.XDTF1QRnxqFdXRUiSLs0


            This will create a "a random sequence" password for you to use. If you use no salt, then you may not be able to recreate this same string afterwards.



            However if you use a salt like this:



            md5pass word 512

            $1$512$.0jcLPQ83jgszaPT8xzds0


            then you can create a sequence which you can recover if you use the word in conjunction with the same salt (or jump) if it was originally defined.






            share|improve this answer














            You can use one of md5 tools that has precisely this purpose. In the case of creating a completely random password you can use the md5pass. It is a very simple tool to use and very helpful, since you can use "normal text" together with a "salt" to jump-bit construction of the same password that you can recover afterwards, or alternatively you may want to get a completely random password all the time. The general usage is:



            md5pass [password] [salt]


            where password is a chosen word that will be used for the construction of the random string and salt is the jump in bytes to be used. Like this:



            md5pass word

            $1$.MUittVW$j.XDTF1QRnxqFdXRUiSLs0


            This will create a "a random sequence" password for you to use. If you use no salt, then you may not be able to recreate this same string afterwards.



            However if you use a salt like this:



            md5pass word 512

            $1$512$.0jcLPQ83jgszaPT8xzds0


            then you can create a sequence which you can recover if you use the word in conjunction with the same salt (or jump) if it was originally defined.







            share|improve this answer














            share|improve this answer



            share|improve this answer








            edited Sep 26 '15 at 8:49









            landroni

            2,99582235




            2,99582235










            answered Sep 25 '15 at 19:24









            Paulo Maia

            601159




            601159











            • When a salt is being used, this sounds similar to the PasswordMaker approach...
              – landroni
              Sep 26 '15 at 8:20











            • -Yes May sound similar to one maker password, but the difference is that it is not a commercial program or anything, because the set of md5 tools, "md5pass, md5sum, md5sum.textutils" dealt with here are concerned and are available the system at no cost some !!!
              – Paulo Maia
              Sep 26 '15 at 13:17










            • I actually had in mind PasswordMaker, which is also open-source and non-commercial.
              – landroni
              Sep 26 '15 at 16:43

















            • When a salt is being used, this sounds similar to the PasswordMaker approach...
              – landroni
              Sep 26 '15 at 8:20











            • -Yes May sound similar to one maker password, but the difference is that it is not a commercial program or anything, because the set of md5 tools, "md5pass, md5sum, md5sum.textutils" dealt with here are concerned and are available the system at no cost some !!!
              – Paulo Maia
              Sep 26 '15 at 13:17










            • I actually had in mind PasswordMaker, which is also open-source and non-commercial.
              – landroni
              Sep 26 '15 at 16:43
















            When a salt is being used, this sounds similar to the PasswordMaker approach...
            – landroni
            Sep 26 '15 at 8:20





            When a salt is being used, this sounds similar to the PasswordMaker approach...
            – landroni
            Sep 26 '15 at 8:20













            -Yes May sound similar to one maker password, but the difference is that it is not a commercial program or anything, because the set of md5 tools, "md5pass, md5sum, md5sum.textutils" dealt with here are concerned and are available the system at no cost some !!!
            – Paulo Maia
            Sep 26 '15 at 13:17




            -Yes May sound similar to one maker password, but the difference is that it is not a commercial program or anything, because the set of md5 tools, "md5pass, md5sum, md5sum.textutils" dealt with here are concerned and are available the system at no cost some !!!
            – Paulo Maia
            Sep 26 '15 at 13:17












            I actually had in mind PasswordMaker, which is also open-source and non-commercial.
            – landroni
            Sep 26 '15 at 16:43





            I actually had in mind PasswordMaker, which is also open-source and non-commercial.
            – landroni
            Sep 26 '15 at 16:43











            up vote
            2
            down vote













            These two commands generate random passwords and passphrases, respectively.



            shuf --random-source=/dev/urandom --repeat --head-count=20 file_with_characters | tr --delete 'n'

            shuf --random-source=/dev/urandom --repeat --head-count=7 file_with_words | tr 'n' ' '


            The password generator requires a file_with_characters containing all the characters you want the password to use, one character per line, and exactly one time each. The file must not contain blank lines, and lines must be newline-terminated.



            The passphrase generator requires a file_with_words containing all the words you want the passphrase to use, one word per line, and exactly one time each. The file must not contain blank lines, and lines must be newline-terminated.



            The --head-count option specifies the length of the password--in characters--or passphrase--in words.






            share|improve this answer
























              up vote
              2
              down vote













              These two commands generate random passwords and passphrases, respectively.



              shuf --random-source=/dev/urandom --repeat --head-count=20 file_with_characters | tr --delete 'n'

              shuf --random-source=/dev/urandom --repeat --head-count=7 file_with_words | tr 'n' ' '


              The password generator requires a file_with_characters containing all the characters you want the password to use, one character per line, and exactly one time each. The file must not contain blank lines, and lines must be newline-terminated.



              The passphrase generator requires a file_with_words containing all the words you want the passphrase to use, one word per line, and exactly one time each. The file must not contain blank lines, and lines must be newline-terminated.



              The --head-count option specifies the length of the password--in characters--or passphrase--in words.






              share|improve this answer






















                up vote
                2
                down vote










                up vote
                2
                down vote









                These two commands generate random passwords and passphrases, respectively.



                shuf --random-source=/dev/urandom --repeat --head-count=20 file_with_characters | tr --delete 'n'

                shuf --random-source=/dev/urandom --repeat --head-count=7 file_with_words | tr 'n' ' '


                The password generator requires a file_with_characters containing all the characters you want the password to use, one character per line, and exactly one time each. The file must not contain blank lines, and lines must be newline-terminated.



                The passphrase generator requires a file_with_words containing all the words you want the passphrase to use, one word per line, and exactly one time each. The file must not contain blank lines, and lines must be newline-terminated.



                The --head-count option specifies the length of the password--in characters--or passphrase--in words.






                share|improve this answer












                These two commands generate random passwords and passphrases, respectively.



                shuf --random-source=/dev/urandom --repeat --head-count=20 file_with_characters | tr --delete 'n'

                shuf --random-source=/dev/urandom --repeat --head-count=7 file_with_words | tr 'n' ' '


                The password generator requires a file_with_characters containing all the characters you want the password to use, one character per line, and exactly one time each. The file must not contain blank lines, and lines must be newline-terminated.



                The passphrase generator requires a file_with_words containing all the words you want the passphrase to use, one word per line, and exactly one time each. The file must not contain blank lines, and lines must be newline-terminated.



                The --head-count option specifies the length of the password--in characters--or passphrase--in words.







                share|improve this answer












                share|improve this answer



                share|improve this answer










                answered Aug 27 '16 at 16:47









                Pablo Repetto

                211




                211




















                    up vote
                    1
                    down vote













                    Inspired by Pablo Repetto I ended up with this easy to remember solution:



                    shuf -zer -n20 A..Z a..z 0..9


                    -z avoids multi line output



                    -e echo the result



                    -r allow any character to appear multiple times



                    -n20 random string with a length of 20 characters



                    A..Z a..z 0..9 allowed char classes



                    shuf is part of the linux coreutils and widely available or at least been ported.






                    share|improve this answer
























                      up vote
                      1
                      down vote













                      Inspired by Pablo Repetto I ended up with this easy to remember solution:



                      shuf -zer -n20 A..Z a..z 0..9


                      -z avoids multi line output



                      -e echo the result



                      -r allow any character to appear multiple times



                      -n20 random string with a length of 20 characters



                      A..Z a..z 0..9 allowed char classes



                      shuf is part of the linux coreutils and widely available or at least been ported.






                      share|improve this answer






















                        up vote
                        1
                        down vote










                        up vote
                        1
                        down vote









                        Inspired by Pablo Repetto I ended up with this easy to remember solution:



                        shuf -zer -n20 A..Z a..z 0..9


                        -z avoids multi line output



                        -e echo the result



                        -r allow any character to appear multiple times



                        -n20 random string with a length of 20 characters



                        A..Z a..z 0..9 allowed char classes



                        shuf is part of the linux coreutils and widely available or at least been ported.






                        share|improve this answer












                        Inspired by Pablo Repetto I ended up with this easy to remember solution:



                        shuf -zer -n20 A..Z a..z 0..9


                        -z avoids multi line output



                        -e echo the result



                        -r allow any character to appear multiple times



                        -n20 random string with a length of 20 characters



                        A..Z a..z 0..9 allowed char classes



                        shuf is part of the linux coreutils and widely available or at least been ported.







                        share|improve this answer












                        share|improve this answer



                        share|improve this answer










                        answered Oct 29 '16 at 22:06









                        entwicklerseite

                        111




                        111




















                            up vote
                            1
                            down vote













                            APG is the default software in linux distributions.



                            To generate passwords from size 5 to 10 in subsets Special, Numeric, Capital un Small, it is :



                            apg -MSNCL -m 5 -x 10


                            Returns



                            @OpVeyhym9
                            3:Glul
                            3DroomIc?
                            hed&Os0
                            NefIj%Ob3
                            35Quok}


                            As said by @landroni a comment.






                            share|improve this answer




















                            • Here are the options to generate random 14 letter passwords containing lots of special characters: apg -a1 -m14
                              – neuhaus
                              Nov 11 '17 at 19:10














                            up vote
                            1
                            down vote













                            APG is the default software in linux distributions.



                            To generate passwords from size 5 to 10 in subsets Special, Numeric, Capital un Small, it is :



                            apg -MSNCL -m 5 -x 10


                            Returns



                            @OpVeyhym9
                            3:Glul
                            3DroomIc?
                            hed&Os0
                            NefIj%Ob3
                            35Quok}


                            As said by @landroni a comment.






                            share|improve this answer




















                            • Here are the options to generate random 14 letter passwords containing lots of special characters: apg -a1 -m14
                              – neuhaus
                              Nov 11 '17 at 19:10












                            up vote
                            1
                            down vote










                            up vote
                            1
                            down vote









                            APG is the default software in linux distributions.



                            To generate passwords from size 5 to 10 in subsets Special, Numeric, Capital un Small, it is :



                            apg -MSNCL -m 5 -x 10


                            Returns



                            @OpVeyhym9
                            3:Glul
                            3DroomIc?
                            hed&Os0
                            NefIj%Ob3
                            35Quok}


                            As said by @landroni a comment.






                            share|improve this answer












                            APG is the default software in linux distributions.



                            To generate passwords from size 5 to 10 in subsets Special, Numeric, Capital un Small, it is :



                            apg -MSNCL -m 5 -x 10


                            Returns



                            @OpVeyhym9
                            3:Glul
                            3DroomIc?
                            hed&Os0
                            NefIj%Ob3
                            35Quok}


                            As said by @landroni a comment.







                            share|improve this answer












                            share|improve this answer



                            share|improve this answer










                            answered Jan 22 '17 at 15:24









                            Sandburg

                            658




                            658











                            • Here are the options to generate random 14 letter passwords containing lots of special characters: apg -a1 -m14
                              – neuhaus
                              Nov 11 '17 at 19:10
















                            • Here are the options to generate random 14 letter passwords containing lots of special characters: apg -a1 -m14
                              – neuhaus
                              Nov 11 '17 at 19:10















                            Here are the options to generate random 14 letter passwords containing lots of special characters: apg -a1 -m14
                            – neuhaus
                            Nov 11 '17 at 19:10




                            Here are the options to generate random 14 letter passwords containing lots of special characters: apg -a1 -m14
                            – neuhaus
                            Nov 11 '17 at 19:10










                            up vote
                            0
                            down vote













                            A super easy and simple (probably more simple than you're looking for) way to achieve this would be to generate a random number in a given range, convert that number to its equivalent ASCII character, and append it to the end of a string.



                            Here's a basic example in Python:



                            import random # import random library 
                            passFile = open("passwords.txt", 'w') # create file passwords.txt
                            passNum = int(input("Number of passwords: ")) # get number of passwords
                            passLength = int(input("Password length: ")) # get length of passwords
                            for i in range(passNum):
                            password = "" # reset password
                            for i in range(passLength):
                            num = random.randint(65, 122) # get random number
                            while num in range(91, 97): # Don't include punctuation
                            num = random.randint(65, 122)
                            password += chr(num) # add character to current password
                            passFile.write(password + "n") # add current password to file
                            passFile.close() # close file


                            EDIT: added comments, and added code to generate multiple passwords and write them to a file






                            share|improve this answer


















                            • 2




                              If given the power of Python I would NOT do it in this fashion. It would be much easier to use a join on a string containing all characters valid for a password and using random to select out the characters.
                              – Mike McMahon
                              Sep 20 '15 at 5:20











                            • better to use Python like this code.activestate.com/recipes/578468-password-generator-mkpasswd
                              – Grijesh Chauhan
                              Sep 21 '15 at 9:16














                            up vote
                            0
                            down vote













                            A super easy and simple (probably more simple than you're looking for) way to achieve this would be to generate a random number in a given range, convert that number to its equivalent ASCII character, and append it to the end of a string.



                            Here's a basic example in Python:



                            import random # import random library 
                            passFile = open("passwords.txt", 'w') # create file passwords.txt
                            passNum = int(input("Number of passwords: ")) # get number of passwords
                            passLength = int(input("Password length: ")) # get length of passwords
                            for i in range(passNum):
                            password = "" # reset password
                            for i in range(passLength):
                            num = random.randint(65, 122) # get random number
                            while num in range(91, 97): # Don't include punctuation
                            num = random.randint(65, 122)
                            password += chr(num) # add character to current password
                            passFile.write(password + "n") # add current password to file
                            passFile.close() # close file


                            EDIT: added comments, and added code to generate multiple passwords and write them to a file






                            share|improve this answer


















                            • 2




                              If given the power of Python I would NOT do it in this fashion. It would be much easier to use a join on a string containing all characters valid for a password and using random to select out the characters.
                              – Mike McMahon
                              Sep 20 '15 at 5:20











                            • better to use Python like this code.activestate.com/recipes/578468-password-generator-mkpasswd
                              – Grijesh Chauhan
                              Sep 21 '15 at 9:16












                            up vote
                            0
                            down vote










                            up vote
                            0
                            down vote









                            A super easy and simple (probably more simple than you're looking for) way to achieve this would be to generate a random number in a given range, convert that number to its equivalent ASCII character, and append it to the end of a string.



                            Here's a basic example in Python:



                            import random # import random library 
                            passFile = open("passwords.txt", 'w') # create file passwords.txt
                            passNum = int(input("Number of passwords: ")) # get number of passwords
                            passLength = int(input("Password length: ")) # get length of passwords
                            for i in range(passNum):
                            password = "" # reset password
                            for i in range(passLength):
                            num = random.randint(65, 122) # get random number
                            while num in range(91, 97): # Don't include punctuation
                            num = random.randint(65, 122)
                            password += chr(num) # add character to current password
                            passFile.write(password + "n") # add current password to file
                            passFile.close() # close file


                            EDIT: added comments, and added code to generate multiple passwords and write them to a file






                            share|improve this answer














                            A super easy and simple (probably more simple than you're looking for) way to achieve this would be to generate a random number in a given range, convert that number to its equivalent ASCII character, and append it to the end of a string.



                            Here's a basic example in Python:



                            import random # import random library 
                            passFile = open("passwords.txt", 'w') # create file passwords.txt
                            passNum = int(input("Number of passwords: ")) # get number of passwords
                            passLength = int(input("Password length: ")) # get length of passwords
                            for i in range(passNum):
                            password = "" # reset password
                            for i in range(passLength):
                            num = random.randint(65, 122) # get random number
                            while num in range(91, 97): # Don't include punctuation
                            num = random.randint(65, 122)
                            password += chr(num) # add character to current password
                            passFile.write(password + "n") # add current password to file
                            passFile.close() # close file


                            EDIT: added comments, and added code to generate multiple passwords and write them to a file







                            share|improve this answer














                            share|improve this answer



                            share|improve this answer








                            edited Sep 20 '15 at 7:14









                            alexwlchan

                            50337




                            50337










                            answered Sep 20 '15 at 0:09









                            camelCaseEnthusiast

                            11




                            11







                            • 2




                              If given the power of Python I would NOT do it in this fashion. It would be much easier to use a join on a string containing all characters valid for a password and using random to select out the characters.
                              – Mike McMahon
                              Sep 20 '15 at 5:20











                            • better to use Python like this code.activestate.com/recipes/578468-password-generator-mkpasswd
                              – Grijesh Chauhan
                              Sep 21 '15 at 9:16












                            • 2




                              If given the power of Python I would NOT do it in this fashion. It would be much easier to use a join on a string containing all characters valid for a password and using random to select out the characters.
                              – Mike McMahon
                              Sep 20 '15 at 5:20











                            • better to use Python like this code.activestate.com/recipes/578468-password-generator-mkpasswd
                              – Grijesh Chauhan
                              Sep 21 '15 at 9:16







                            2




                            2




                            If given the power of Python I would NOT do it in this fashion. It would be much easier to use a join on a string containing all characters valid for a password and using random to select out the characters.
                            – Mike McMahon
                            Sep 20 '15 at 5:20





                            If given the power of Python I would NOT do it in this fashion. It would be much easier to use a join on a string containing all characters valid for a password and using random to select out the characters.
                            – Mike McMahon
                            Sep 20 '15 at 5:20













                            better to use Python like this code.activestate.com/recipes/578468-password-generator-mkpasswd
                            – Grijesh Chauhan
                            Sep 21 '15 at 9:16




                            better to use Python like this code.activestate.com/recipes/578468-password-generator-mkpasswd
                            – Grijesh Chauhan
                            Sep 21 '15 at 9:16










                            up vote
                            0
                            down vote













                            I maintain secpwgen in Alpine Linux & keep the sources on my Github.



                            It can produce random strings or diceware phrases:



                            musl64 [~]$ secpwgen
                            USAGE: secpwgen <-p[e] | -A[adhsy] | -r | -s[e]> N

                            PASSPHRASE of N words from Diceware dictionary
                            -p generate passphrase
                            -pe generate enhanced (with symbols) passphrase

                            SKEY PASSWORD of N words from S/Key dictionary
                            -s generate passphrase
                            -se generate enhanced (with symbols) passphrase

                            ASCII RANDOM of N elements (at least one option MUST be present)
                            -A Each letter adds the following random elements in output:
                            a alphanumeric characters
                            d decimal digits
                            h hexadecimal digits
                            s special characters
                            y 3-4 letter syllables

                            RAW RANDOM
                            -r output BASE64 encoded string of N random BITS
                            -k output koremutake encoding of N random BITS


                            To generate a 13 character random string you would use:



                            musl64 [~]$ secpwgen -Aas 13
                            ----------------
                            WK5#*V<]M3<CU ;ENTROPY=67.21 bits
                            ----------------
                            INFO: destroying random number generator.
                            INFO: zeroing memory.

                            musl64 [~]$ secpwgen -Aa 13
                            ----------------
                            GP0FIEBM9Y3BT ;ENTROPY=67.21 bits
                            ----------------
                            INFO: destroying random number generator.
                            INFO: zeroing memory.


                            For users to remember a password use the diceware phrases:



                            musl64 [~]$ secpwgen -p 5
                            ----------------
                            wq seen list n8 kerr ;ENTROPY=65.00 bits
                            ----------------
                            INFO: destroying random number generator.
                            INFO: zeroing memory.


                            I personally like:



                            musl64 [~]$ secpwgen -r 512
                            ----------------
                            h62lL7G4gwh3/j9c7YteQvVXoqJrQKKPWVR3Lt7az36DcfWZWtUgBT19iwmJBwP4UahNzPe7qYD7OcklUFpCzQ== ;ENTROPY=512.00 bits
                            ----------------
                            INFO: destroying random number generator.
                            INFO: zeroing memory.





                            share|improve this answer
























                              up vote
                              0
                              down vote













                              I maintain secpwgen in Alpine Linux & keep the sources on my Github.



                              It can produce random strings or diceware phrases:



                              musl64 [~]$ secpwgen
                              USAGE: secpwgen <-p[e] | -A[adhsy] | -r | -s[e]> N

                              PASSPHRASE of N words from Diceware dictionary
                              -p generate passphrase
                              -pe generate enhanced (with symbols) passphrase

                              SKEY PASSWORD of N words from S/Key dictionary
                              -s generate passphrase
                              -se generate enhanced (with symbols) passphrase

                              ASCII RANDOM of N elements (at least one option MUST be present)
                              -A Each letter adds the following random elements in output:
                              a alphanumeric characters
                              d decimal digits
                              h hexadecimal digits
                              s special characters
                              y 3-4 letter syllables

                              RAW RANDOM
                              -r output BASE64 encoded string of N random BITS
                              -k output koremutake encoding of N random BITS


                              To generate a 13 character random string you would use:



                              musl64 [~]$ secpwgen -Aas 13
                              ----------------
                              WK5#*V<]M3<CU ;ENTROPY=67.21 bits
                              ----------------
                              INFO: destroying random number generator.
                              INFO: zeroing memory.

                              musl64 [~]$ secpwgen -Aa 13
                              ----------------
                              GP0FIEBM9Y3BT ;ENTROPY=67.21 bits
                              ----------------
                              INFO: destroying random number generator.
                              INFO: zeroing memory.


                              For users to remember a password use the diceware phrases:



                              musl64 [~]$ secpwgen -p 5
                              ----------------
                              wq seen list n8 kerr ;ENTROPY=65.00 bits
                              ----------------
                              INFO: destroying random number generator.
                              INFO: zeroing memory.


                              I personally like:



                              musl64 [~]$ secpwgen -r 512
                              ----------------
                              h62lL7G4gwh3/j9c7YteQvVXoqJrQKKPWVR3Lt7az36DcfWZWtUgBT19iwmJBwP4UahNzPe7qYD7OcklUFpCzQ== ;ENTROPY=512.00 bits
                              ----------------
                              INFO: destroying random number generator.
                              INFO: zeroing memory.





                              share|improve this answer






















                                up vote
                                0
                                down vote










                                up vote
                                0
                                down vote









                                I maintain secpwgen in Alpine Linux & keep the sources on my Github.



                                It can produce random strings or diceware phrases:



                                musl64 [~]$ secpwgen
                                USAGE: secpwgen <-p[e] | -A[adhsy] | -r | -s[e]> N

                                PASSPHRASE of N words from Diceware dictionary
                                -p generate passphrase
                                -pe generate enhanced (with symbols) passphrase

                                SKEY PASSWORD of N words from S/Key dictionary
                                -s generate passphrase
                                -se generate enhanced (with symbols) passphrase

                                ASCII RANDOM of N elements (at least one option MUST be present)
                                -A Each letter adds the following random elements in output:
                                a alphanumeric characters
                                d decimal digits
                                h hexadecimal digits
                                s special characters
                                y 3-4 letter syllables

                                RAW RANDOM
                                -r output BASE64 encoded string of N random BITS
                                -k output koremutake encoding of N random BITS


                                To generate a 13 character random string you would use:



                                musl64 [~]$ secpwgen -Aas 13
                                ----------------
                                WK5#*V<]M3<CU ;ENTROPY=67.21 bits
                                ----------------
                                INFO: destroying random number generator.
                                INFO: zeroing memory.

                                musl64 [~]$ secpwgen -Aa 13
                                ----------------
                                GP0FIEBM9Y3BT ;ENTROPY=67.21 bits
                                ----------------
                                INFO: destroying random number generator.
                                INFO: zeroing memory.


                                For users to remember a password use the diceware phrases:



                                musl64 [~]$ secpwgen -p 5
                                ----------------
                                wq seen list n8 kerr ;ENTROPY=65.00 bits
                                ----------------
                                INFO: destroying random number generator.
                                INFO: zeroing memory.


                                I personally like:



                                musl64 [~]$ secpwgen -r 512
                                ----------------
                                h62lL7G4gwh3/j9c7YteQvVXoqJrQKKPWVR3Lt7az36DcfWZWtUgBT19iwmJBwP4UahNzPe7qYD7OcklUFpCzQ== ;ENTROPY=512.00 bits
                                ----------------
                                INFO: destroying random number generator.
                                INFO: zeroing memory.





                                share|improve this answer












                                I maintain secpwgen in Alpine Linux & keep the sources on my Github.



                                It can produce random strings or diceware phrases:



                                musl64 [~]$ secpwgen
                                USAGE: secpwgen <-p[e] | -A[adhsy] | -r | -s[e]> N

                                PASSPHRASE of N words from Diceware dictionary
                                -p generate passphrase
                                -pe generate enhanced (with symbols) passphrase

                                SKEY PASSWORD of N words from S/Key dictionary
                                -s generate passphrase
                                -se generate enhanced (with symbols) passphrase

                                ASCII RANDOM of N elements (at least one option MUST be present)
                                -A Each letter adds the following random elements in output:
                                a alphanumeric characters
                                d decimal digits
                                h hexadecimal digits
                                s special characters
                                y 3-4 letter syllables

                                RAW RANDOM
                                -r output BASE64 encoded string of N random BITS
                                -k output koremutake encoding of N random BITS


                                To generate a 13 character random string you would use:



                                musl64 [~]$ secpwgen -Aas 13
                                ----------------
                                WK5#*V<]M3<CU ;ENTROPY=67.21 bits
                                ----------------
                                INFO: destroying random number generator.
                                INFO: zeroing memory.

                                musl64 [~]$ secpwgen -Aa 13
                                ----------------
                                GP0FIEBM9Y3BT ;ENTROPY=67.21 bits
                                ----------------
                                INFO: destroying random number generator.
                                INFO: zeroing memory.


                                For users to remember a password use the diceware phrases:



                                musl64 [~]$ secpwgen -p 5
                                ----------------
                                wq seen list n8 kerr ;ENTROPY=65.00 bits
                                ----------------
                                INFO: destroying random number generator.
                                INFO: zeroing memory.


                                I personally like:



                                musl64 [~]$ secpwgen -r 512
                                ----------------
                                h62lL7G4gwh3/j9c7YteQvVXoqJrQKKPWVR3Lt7az36DcfWZWtUgBT19iwmJBwP4UahNzPe7qYD7OcklUFpCzQ== ;ENTROPY=512.00 bits
                                ----------------
                                INFO: destroying random number generator.
                                INFO: zeroing memory.






                                share|improve this answer












                                share|improve this answer



                                share|improve this answer










                                answered Apr 7 '17 at 3:14









                                Stuart Cardall

                                70659




                                70659




















                                    up vote
                                    0
                                    down vote













                                    I've found that piping /dev/urandom to tr on macOS didn't work. Here's another way:



                                    set="abcdefghijklmonpqrstuvwxyzABCDEFGHIJKLMNOPQRSTUVWXYZ0123456789"
                                    n=6
                                    rand=""
                                    for i in `seq 1 $n`; do
                                    char=$set:$RANDOM % $#set:1
                                    rand+=$char
                                    done
                                    echo $rand





                                    share|improve this answer
























                                      up vote
                                      0
                                      down vote













                                      I've found that piping /dev/urandom to tr on macOS didn't work. Here's another way:



                                      set="abcdefghijklmonpqrstuvwxyzABCDEFGHIJKLMNOPQRSTUVWXYZ0123456789"
                                      n=6
                                      rand=""
                                      for i in `seq 1 $n`; do
                                      char=$set:$RANDOM % $#set:1
                                      rand+=$char
                                      done
                                      echo $rand





                                      share|improve this answer






















                                        up vote
                                        0
                                        down vote










                                        up vote
                                        0
                                        down vote









                                        I've found that piping /dev/urandom to tr on macOS didn't work. Here's another way:



                                        set="abcdefghijklmonpqrstuvwxyzABCDEFGHIJKLMNOPQRSTUVWXYZ0123456789"
                                        n=6
                                        rand=""
                                        for i in `seq 1 $n`; do
                                        char=$set:$RANDOM % $#set:1
                                        rand+=$char
                                        done
                                        echo $rand





                                        share|improve this answer












                                        I've found that piping /dev/urandom to tr on macOS didn't work. Here's another way:



                                        set="abcdefghijklmonpqrstuvwxyzABCDEFGHIJKLMNOPQRSTUVWXYZ0123456789"
                                        n=6
                                        rand=""
                                        for i in `seq 1 $n`; do
                                        char=$set:$RANDOM % $#set:1
                                        rand+=$char
                                        done
                                        echo $rand






                                        share|improve this answer












                                        share|improve this answer



                                        share|improve this answer










                                        answered Jul 18 at 21:59









                                        Jake

                                        1616




                                        1616




















                                            up vote
                                            0
                                            down vote













                                            I use:



                                            base64 < /dev/urandom | tr -d 'O0Il1+' | head -c 44



                                            This gives me 57 possible characters. The string can be copy-pasted (removed + and ) or printed and retyped as the difficult to distinguish characters (I1lO0) have been removed.



                                            • 44 characters gives me: log2(5744) > 256.64 bits of entropy

                                            • 22 characters gives me: log2(5744) > 128.32 bits of entropy

                                            I like this because:



                                            • it is simple to type/remember

                                            • it uses standard system tools - no extra binaries

                                            • doesn't "waste" much randomness (uses 89% of the random bits it receives vs ~24% for solutions directly piping to tr)

                                            • 22 and 44 characters pair quite nicely (just above even) common power of two breakpoints

                                            • the output can be easily selected and pasted or printed and retyped with minimal human error rates

                                            • shorter than hex encoded (32 and 64 instead of 22 and 44) solutions such as md5sum/sha1sum, etc.

                                            Credit to https://unix.stackexchange.com/a/230676/9583 and especially the comments for my initial inspiration.





                                            share
























                                              up vote
                                              0
                                              down vote













                                              I use:



                                              base64 < /dev/urandom | tr -d 'O0Il1+' | head -c 44



                                              This gives me 57 possible characters. The string can be copy-pasted (removed + and ) or printed and retyped as the difficult to distinguish characters (I1lO0) have been removed.



                                              • 44 characters gives me: log2(5744) > 256.64 bits of entropy

                                              • 22 characters gives me: log2(5744) > 128.32 bits of entropy

                                              I like this because:



                                              • it is simple to type/remember

                                              • it uses standard system tools - no extra binaries

                                              • doesn't "waste" much randomness (uses 89% of the random bits it receives vs ~24% for solutions directly piping to tr)

                                              • 22 and 44 characters pair quite nicely (just above even) common power of two breakpoints

                                              • the output can be easily selected and pasted or printed and retyped with minimal human error rates

                                              • shorter than hex encoded (32 and 64 instead of 22 and 44) solutions such as md5sum/sha1sum, etc.

                                              Credit to https://unix.stackexchange.com/a/230676/9583 and especially the comments for my initial inspiration.





                                              share






















                                                up vote
                                                0
                                                down vote










                                                up vote
                                                0
                                                down vote









                                                I use:



                                                base64 < /dev/urandom | tr -d 'O0Il1+' | head -c 44



                                                This gives me 57 possible characters. The string can be copy-pasted (removed + and ) or printed and retyped as the difficult to distinguish characters (I1lO0) have been removed.



                                                • 44 characters gives me: log2(5744) > 256.64 bits of entropy

                                                • 22 characters gives me: log2(5744) > 128.32 bits of entropy

                                                I like this because:



                                                • it is simple to type/remember

                                                • it uses standard system tools - no extra binaries

                                                • doesn't "waste" much randomness (uses 89% of the random bits it receives vs ~24% for solutions directly piping to tr)

                                                • 22 and 44 characters pair quite nicely (just above even) common power of two breakpoints

                                                • the output can be easily selected and pasted or printed and retyped with minimal human error rates

                                                • shorter than hex encoded (32 and 64 instead of 22 and 44) solutions such as md5sum/sha1sum, etc.

                                                Credit to https://unix.stackexchange.com/a/230676/9583 and especially the comments for my initial inspiration.





                                                share












                                                I use:



                                                base64 < /dev/urandom | tr -d 'O0Il1+' | head -c 44



                                                This gives me 57 possible characters. The string can be copy-pasted (removed + and ) or printed and retyped as the difficult to distinguish characters (I1lO0) have been removed.



                                                • 44 characters gives me: log2(5744) > 256.64 bits of entropy

                                                • 22 characters gives me: log2(5744) > 128.32 bits of entropy

                                                I like this because:



                                                • it is simple to type/remember

                                                • it uses standard system tools - no extra binaries

                                                • doesn't "waste" much randomness (uses 89% of the random bits it receives vs ~24% for solutions directly piping to tr)

                                                • 22 and 44 characters pair quite nicely (just above even) common power of two breakpoints

                                                • the output can be easily selected and pasted or printed and retyped with minimal human error rates

                                                • shorter than hex encoded (32 and 64 instead of 22 and 44) solutions such as md5sum/sha1sum, etc.

                                                Credit to https://unix.stackexchange.com/a/230676/9583 and especially the comments for my initial inspiration.






                                                share











                                                share


                                                share










                                                answered 6 mins ago









                                                Iiridayn

                                                1317




                                                1317




















                                                    up vote
                                                    -1
                                                    down vote













                                                    I'd like this command:



                                                    date +%s | sha256sum | base64 | head -c 12





                                                    share|improve this answer
















                                                    • 1




                                                      I would rather use more random nanoseconds approach: date +%N Since if you generate many users and passwords in a script, the seconds might become same for many or even for all date commands, thus producing identical passwords.
                                                      – John Mayor
                                                      Apr 28 '17 at 12:53






                                                    • 1




                                                      @JohnMayor: is this approach more robust: dd if=/dev/random bs=512 count=1 ?
                                                      – Eugen Konkov
                                                      Apr 28 '17 at 13:48






                                                    • 5




                                                      This answers is highly dangerous! You generate the password(s) from a known seed which is easy to predict. I could generate all passwords generated using this method of the last years and use this list for brute forcing purposes.
                                                      – Flow
                                                      Jul 1 '17 at 17:20















                                                    up vote
                                                    -1
                                                    down vote













                                                    I'd like this command:



                                                    date +%s | sha256sum | base64 | head -c 12





                                                    share|improve this answer
















                                                    • 1




                                                      I would rather use more random nanoseconds approach: date +%N Since if you generate many users and passwords in a script, the seconds might become same for many or even for all date commands, thus producing identical passwords.
                                                      – John Mayor
                                                      Apr 28 '17 at 12:53






                                                    • 1




                                                      @JohnMayor: is this approach more robust: dd if=/dev/random bs=512 count=1 ?
                                                      – Eugen Konkov
                                                      Apr 28 '17 at 13:48






                                                    • 5




                                                      This answers is highly dangerous! You generate the password(s) from a known seed which is easy to predict. I could generate all passwords generated using this method of the last years and use this list for brute forcing purposes.
                                                      – Flow
                                                      Jul 1 '17 at 17:20













                                                    up vote
                                                    -1
                                                    down vote










                                                    up vote
                                                    -1
                                                    down vote









                                                    I'd like this command:



                                                    date +%s | sha256sum | base64 | head -c 12





                                                    share|improve this answer












                                                    I'd like this command:



                                                    date +%s | sha256sum | base64 | head -c 12






                                                    share|improve this answer












                                                    share|improve this answer



                                                    share|improve this answer










                                                    answered Nov 19 '16 at 10:13









                                                    Eugen Konkov

                                                    17411




                                                    17411







                                                    • 1




                                                      I would rather use more random nanoseconds approach: date +%N Since if you generate many users and passwords in a script, the seconds might become same for many or even for all date commands, thus producing identical passwords.
                                                      – John Mayor
                                                      Apr 28 '17 at 12:53






                                                    • 1




                                                      @JohnMayor: is this approach more robust: dd if=/dev/random bs=512 count=1 ?
                                                      – Eugen Konkov
                                                      Apr 28 '17 at 13:48






                                                    • 5




                                                      This answers is highly dangerous! You generate the password(s) from a known seed which is easy to predict. I could generate all passwords generated using this method of the last years and use this list for brute forcing purposes.
                                                      – Flow
                                                      Jul 1 '17 at 17:20













                                                    • 1




                                                      I would rather use more random nanoseconds approach: date +%N Since if you generate many users and passwords in a script, the seconds might become same for many or even for all date commands, thus producing identical passwords.
                                                      – John Mayor
                                                      Apr 28 '17 at 12:53






                                                    • 1




                                                      @JohnMayor: is this approach more robust: dd if=/dev/random bs=512 count=1 ?
                                                      – Eugen Konkov
                                                      Apr 28 '17 at 13:48






                                                    • 5




                                                      This answers is highly dangerous! You generate the password(s) from a known seed which is easy to predict. I could generate all passwords generated using this method of the last years and use this list for brute forcing purposes.
                                                      – Flow
                                                      Jul 1 '17 at 17:20








                                                    1




                                                    1




                                                    I would rather use more random nanoseconds approach: date +%N Since if you generate many users and passwords in a script, the seconds might become same for many or even for all date commands, thus producing identical passwords.
                                                    – John Mayor
                                                    Apr 28 '17 at 12:53




                                                    I would rather use more random nanoseconds approach: date +%N Since if you generate many users and passwords in a script, the seconds might become same for many or even for all date commands, thus producing identical passwords.
                                                    – John Mayor
                                                    Apr 28 '17 at 12:53




                                                    1




                                                    1




                                                    @JohnMayor: is this approach more robust: dd if=/dev/random bs=512 count=1 ?
                                                    – Eugen Konkov
                                                    Apr 28 '17 at 13:48




                                                    @JohnMayor: is this approach more robust: dd if=/dev/random bs=512 count=1 ?
                                                    – Eugen Konkov
                                                    Apr 28 '17 at 13:48




                                                    5




                                                    5




                                                    This answers is highly dangerous! You generate the password(s) from a known seed which is easy to predict. I could generate all passwords generated using this method of the last years and use this list for brute forcing purposes.
                                                    – Flow
                                                    Jul 1 '17 at 17:20





                                                    This answers is highly dangerous! You generate the password(s) from a known seed which is easy to predict. I could generate all passwords generated using this method of the last years and use this list for brute forcing purposes.
                                                    – Flow
                                                    Jul 1 '17 at 17:20











                                                    up vote
                                                    -3
                                                    down vote













                                                    I go, to
                                                    http://passwordsgenerator.net/
                                                    it allows generating strings of random characters up to 2048 characters, selecting upper case, lower case, digits 0 to 9, punctuation marks, or any combination.






                                                    share|improve this answer
















                                                    • 1




                                                      I've clarified the question to make it explicit that off-line generated strings are preferable. Generating a password directly on a website, especially if the connection is not HTTPS (as in your answer), is not secure.
                                                      – landroni
                                                      Sep 26 '15 at 7:09










                                                    • Getting a random password from the internet is spectacularly stupid & naive. Someone now knows a password you are using for some service or site and unique personal details about you (IP address, browser/environment info). This site can now cross-reference the info with other data collected about you. For example, you once posted to a mailing list, your IP address is in the mail’s header, so we now have a password, name, and an email address... You are really trusting random strangers with your passwords here.
                                                      – Martin Tournoij
                                                      Aug 27 '16 at 17:35














                                                    up vote
                                                    -3
                                                    down vote













                                                    I go, to
                                                    http://passwordsgenerator.net/
                                                    it allows generating strings of random characters up to 2048 characters, selecting upper case, lower case, digits 0 to 9, punctuation marks, or any combination.






                                                    share|improve this answer
















                                                    • 1




                                                      I've clarified the question to make it explicit that off-line generated strings are preferable. Generating a password directly on a website, especially if the connection is not HTTPS (as in your answer), is not secure.
                                                      – landroni
                                                      Sep 26 '15 at 7:09










                                                    • Getting a random password from the internet is spectacularly stupid & naive. Someone now knows a password you are using for some service or site and unique personal details about you (IP address, browser/environment info). This site can now cross-reference the info with other data collected about you. For example, you once posted to a mailing list, your IP address is in the mail’s header, so we now have a password, name, and an email address... You are really trusting random strangers with your passwords here.
                                                      – Martin Tournoij
                                                      Aug 27 '16 at 17:35












                                                    up vote
                                                    -3
                                                    down vote










                                                    up vote
                                                    -3
                                                    down vote









                                                    I go, to
                                                    http://passwordsgenerator.net/
                                                    it allows generating strings of random characters up to 2048 characters, selecting upper case, lower case, digits 0 to 9, punctuation marks, or any combination.






                                                    share|improve this answer












                                                    I go, to
                                                    http://passwordsgenerator.net/
                                                    it allows generating strings of random characters up to 2048 characters, selecting upper case, lower case, digits 0 to 9, punctuation marks, or any combination.







                                                    share|improve this answer












                                                    share|improve this answer



                                                    share|improve this answer










                                                    answered Sep 25 '15 at 19:05









                                                    KrazyKyngeKorny

                                                    1




                                                    1







                                                    • 1




                                                      I've clarified the question to make it explicit that off-line generated strings are preferable. Generating a password directly on a website, especially if the connection is not HTTPS (as in your answer), is not secure.
                                                      – landroni
                                                      Sep 26 '15 at 7:09










                                                    • Getting a random password from the internet is spectacularly stupid & naive. Someone now knows a password you are using for some service or site and unique personal details about you (IP address, browser/environment info). This site can now cross-reference the info with other data collected about you. For example, you once posted to a mailing list, your IP address is in the mail’s header, so we now have a password, name, and an email address... You are really trusting random strangers with your passwords here.
                                                      – Martin Tournoij
                                                      Aug 27 '16 at 17:35












                                                    • 1




                                                      I've clarified the question to make it explicit that off-line generated strings are preferable. Generating a password directly on a website, especially if the connection is not HTTPS (as in your answer), is not secure.
                                                      – landroni
                                                      Sep 26 '15 at 7:09










                                                    • Getting a random password from the internet is spectacularly stupid & naive. Someone now knows a password you are using for some service or site and unique personal details about you (IP address, browser/environment info). This site can now cross-reference the info with other data collected about you. For example, you once posted to a mailing list, your IP address is in the mail’s header, so we now have a password, name, and an email address... You are really trusting random strangers with your passwords here.
                                                      – Martin Tournoij
                                                      Aug 27 '16 at 17:35







                                                    1




                                                    1




                                                    I've clarified the question to make it explicit that off-line generated strings are preferable. Generating a password directly on a website, especially if the connection is not HTTPS (as in your answer), is not secure.
                                                    – landroni
                                                    Sep 26 '15 at 7:09




                                                    I've clarified the question to make it explicit that off-line generated strings are preferable. Generating a password directly on a website, especially if the connection is not HTTPS (as in your answer), is not secure.
                                                    – landroni
                                                    Sep 26 '15 at 7:09












                                                    Getting a random password from the internet is spectacularly stupid & naive. Someone now knows a password you are using for some service or site and unique personal details about you (IP address, browser/environment info). This site can now cross-reference the info with other data collected about you. For example, you once posted to a mailing list, your IP address is in the mail’s header, so we now have a password, name, and an email address... You are really trusting random strangers with your passwords here.
                                                    – Martin Tournoij
                                                    Aug 27 '16 at 17:35




                                                    Getting a random password from the internet is spectacularly stupid & naive. Someone now knows a password you are using for some service or site and unique personal details about you (IP address, browser/environment info). This site can now cross-reference the info with other data collected about you. For example, you once posted to a mailing list, your IP address is in the mail’s header, so we now have a password, name, and an email address... You are really trusting random strangers with your passwords here.
                                                    – Martin Tournoij
                                                    Aug 27 '16 at 17:35

















                                                     

                                                    draft saved


                                                    draft discarded















































                                                     


                                                    draft saved


                                                    draft discarded














                                                    StackExchange.ready(
                                                    function ()
                                                    StackExchange.openid.initPostLogin('.new-post-login', 'https%3a%2f%2funix.stackexchange.com%2fquestions%2f230673%2fhow-to-generate-a-random-string%23new-answer', 'question_page');

                                                    );

                                                    Post as a guest













































































                                                    Popular posts from this blog

                                                    How to check contact read email or not when send email to Individual?

                                                    Bahrain

                                                    Postfix configuration issue with fips on centos 7; mailgun relay