F4LL0UT: What I don't understand, how is a password that even requires "only" several thousand attempts insufficiently safe in case of online accounts? Even if you're bruteforcing it, the server usually won't allow more than three login attempts in several minutes or up to an hour depending on the service (and in case of many services you get informed via email after a single failed attempt so you have time to go for a safer password). I have heard many times that weak passwords are one of the main reasons for compromised systems but I don't understand how that can be a major reason for online account stuff like on GOG. Isn't malware or using the same password on shady websites infinitely more likely to compromise your password in this case?
When I crack a password, I don't crack it by seeing what the server responds to. I MITM or eavesdrop, pull the hashed or encrypted password, then break it locally. That's what everyone does unless they have a good side channel. It's the most efficient way if you're dealing with normal hardware.
Yes, password re-use and malware like keyloggers are much easier ways to crack an account open, but brute force is rather easy once you know how to eavesdrop on a session.
[url= EDIT: for those of you who know enough that that second sentence looked strange - yes, of course I would generally brute force a larger transmission because hopefully they've used something that was written in the last few decades and encrypts more than just the password part itself. I was taking creative liberty with not having to explain how to open a tunnel or something like that.][/url]
EDIT: Heh, I said "that's what everyone does" like my knowledge is so comprehensive and relevant. I meant "that's what a lot of us do who aren't actual l33t h4xx0rz" because I'm pretty sure I don't know 1% of what a proper system cracker knows.