Test passwords against modern rules and attacker models. Get entropy, score, and safer alternatives instantly. Export results, spot patterns, and strengthen logins today securely.
Tune policies, pick an attacker model, then submit.
These are masked examples. Do not reuse them.
| Example password (masked) | Score | Strength | Entropy (bits) |
|---|---|---|---|
| p•••••••••3 | 8 | Very Weak | 56.9 |
| W•••••••••! | 79 | Strong | 72.3 |
| B•••••••••••••2 | 100 | Very Strong | 98.5 |
| C•••••••••••••••••••••6 | 100 | Very Strong | 151.1 |
| C•••••••••••••••••••••••••! | 100 | Very Strong | 177.8 |
These formulas estimate random guessing. Real attackers prioritize predictable choices first.
Strength is not “complexity”; it is guess resistance. This checker estimates strength from entropy, then adjusts it using policy compliance and pattern penalties. Scores are normalized so that about 80 bits maps to the top range, while values near 40 bits are treated as moderate for many consumer accounts. Results are shown immediately above the form to support quick iteration.
Entropy depends on how many symbols an attacker must consider at each position. The calculator infers a character pool from what you actually used: lowercase (26), uppercase (26), digits (10), symbols (about 33), and optional spaces. Pool is not assumed; it is observed. If you only use letters, the pool stays small, and longer length becomes the primary driver of strength.
Attackers rarely guess uniformly at random. They prioritize common passwords, keyboard walks, and repeated characters, which makes many “high-entropy” looking strings weak in practice. The checker can block a built‑in common list, flag sequences such as 1234 or abcd, and detect triple repeats like “aaa”. It also checks for personal fragments from usernames or email locals, because these reduce the search space dramatically.
Time-to-crack varies more by attack channel than by the score label alone. Online guessing is constrained by throttling, lockouts, and monitoring, while offline attacks can scale to 10^10 guesses per second against weak hashing choices. The calculator estimates search space as pool^L and uses expected guesses of half that space. It then reports times for multiple attacker models so teams can compare scenarios.
Use options to match your environment: raise minimum length for privileged accounts, require more character types for shared credentials, and keep common and sequence blocking enabled for portals. Export CSV or PDF reports for audit trails, but avoid exporting raw passwords unless you explicitly opt in. For training, test sample phrases and review the issues list; it explains which rule failed and how to remediate quickly during security reviews internal. Pair strong passwords with multi‑factor authentication and unique storage practices.
Entropy estimates uncertainty in bits from length and the inferred character pool. More bits usually means more guesses are needed, but human patterns and common choices can still make a password easier to crack.
Attackers try ordered runs and repeated characters early because they are common. The checker applies penalties for patterns like 1234, abcd, qwerty, or triple repeats to reflect that reduced real-world resistance.
Use an online model for login forms with rate limits and monitoring. Use an offline model when stolen hashes are possible, because guessing speeds can be extremely high, especially with weak hashing settings.
Yes, but only if you enable the opt-in setting. Leaving it off reduces accidental exposure in downloads, logs, screenshots, tickets, and shared audit folders.
No. It evaluates input for the current session and keeps the last export data temporarily so downloads work. Avoid testing real passwords on shared or untrusted devices.
Aim for Strong or Very Strong, typically achieved with 12–16+ characters and good variety. For privileged accounts or high-risk systems, prioritize length and uniqueness over memorized complexity.
Important Note: All the Calculators listed in this site are for educational purpose only and we do not guarentee the accuracy of results. Please do consult with other sources as well.