▲ 905 ▼ These F-ing Logins Nowadays (lemmy.today) submitted 1 day ago by LodeMike@lemmy.today to c/programmer_humor@programming.dev 218 comments fedilink hide all child comments
[–] rockerface@lemmy.cafe 133 points 1 day ago (50 children) 2FA is a good thing. You don't want it to go away. permalink fedilink source hideshow 50 child comments replies: [–] drkt@scribe.disroot.org 73 points 1 day ago (2 children) I don't think the 2FA is the issue this comic is attempting to convey. permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 2 child comments replies: [–] urushitan@kakera.kintsugi.moe 12 points 21 hours ago (1 child) Except that it needs another jump for autofill 2fa permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 1 child comment replies: [–] Hal@piefed.nz 1 point 15 hours ago 2FA on the login form is a thing for some sites, permalink fedilink source parent [–] Venator@lemmy.nz 60 points 23 hours ago* (8 children) Except when it's just an email, or worse, a txt message, or worse, a whatsapp message, with no other option for using a proper 2fa generator... But also, not every site needs 2fa, sometimes I really couldn't care less if someone managed to hack into something, because I can just make a new account if that happened... permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 8 child comments replies: [–] ilinamorato@lemmy.world 36 points 22 hours ago (6 children) What really bugs me is that TOTP is objectively easier than any other form of 2fa. Just import the library, add the field on your login form, and you're done. Email verification is annoying to code, it requires SMTP or an email gateway, is slow for the user, is risky from a security perspective, and to generate the code you probably still have to implement TOTP. SMS/RCS is even more annoying to code, it almost inevitably requires a third-party gateway, it can work differently if the user is in a different country or on a MVNO or in a low-signal area or just has the wrong astrological sign, is very slow for the end user, is almost useless from a security perspective, and you STILL have to implement TOTP. WhatsApp messages are somehow even more annoying to code than that, requires an api interaction with Meta (which is never fun and poorly documented), requires the end user to have an account with a specific third party, is slow for the end user, relies on another company's security posture to determine your own, and you STILL have to implement TOTP. Making your own app for 2fa is undoubtedly the worst: not only is it annoying to code, it's an ongoing annoyance that is strained through multiple app stores, adds an additional maintenance and support load, adds additional technical debt, adds an unnecessary attack vector, requires users to download another app, is often unreliable, is often pretty slow for the end user, is a total crapshoot from a security perspective, and guess what? YOU PROBABLY STILL HAVE TO IMPLEMENT TOTP. Any company that chooses SMS or email verification over TOTP emphatically does not know what they're doing. permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 6 child comments replies: [–] Venator@lemmy.nz 15 points 21 hours ago (1 child) 2fa by email is probably slightly easier than TOTP, if the account verification via email is already implemented, but yeah, it's not like it's significantly easier... permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 1 child comment replies: [–] ilinamorato@lemmy.world 5 points 21 hours ago* That is a fair point. But again, you probably have to implement TOTP or something like it anyway, to generate the code. permalink fedilink source parent [–] Miaou@jlai.lu 4 points 21 hours ago (2 children) You don't have to implement totp for these alternatives... The "thing" about totp is that there's a shared secret and a timestamp. Due to potential drift in clocks you need a window and period to know how many time steps to test, and how long each is. But with an email/SMS/WhatsApp, there's no shared secret. So you can simply send a random code, and store server side when it was generated. Totp makes no sense in that case. Not that totp is difficult to implement at all. My implementation for work was what, less than 200 lines of C++ I think? I didn't implement the sha1 myself though. permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 2 child comments replies: [–] ilinamorato@lemmy.world 2 points 20 hours ago An earlier version of that comment said "something like TOTP," but I guess I left that out while I was revising it. My point is you have to implement something that does most of what TOTP does anyway, so why not just use the version that's already been stress tested? permalink fedilink source parent [–] assa123@lemmy.world 1 point 8 hours ago You do have to implement TOTP, just not necessarily RFC 6238. Time-based one-time passwords require a shared secret, a shared time and a time-to-live. The shared secret is usually the key for generating the code, but can be the code itself. The shared time is still needed in mail authentication between the code generator and the code validator. The thing that's usually different is the time to live, but in RFC 6238 it is a parameter, so you can implement mail verification with it and a long TTL. permalink fedilink source parent [–] kungen@feddit.nu 3 points 15 hours ago The real reason is conversion. The majority of users aren't good at technology, so you risk them losing their TOTP secret. Then the user either just says "screw this site" and leaves, or they take time getting customer support to reset their key. So depending on the branch and customer base, it can often be much "cheaper" in the end to send login codes via email instead of using TOTP. permalink fedilink source parent [–] richardisaguy@lemmy.world 2 points 8 hours ago A local marketplace service in brazil only allows me to login using whatsapp codes or sms. When i enter the passowrd they ask for a whatsapp code permalink fedilink source parent [–] CanadaPlus@lemmy.sdf.org 4 points 23 hours ago* (2 children) I get the theory, but if it itself relies on some login-based service (like email) it becomes a kind of chicken and egg problem. permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 2 child comments replies: [–] whelk@retrolemmy.com 2 points 19 hours ago Reminds me of all the times I've run into "Please provide another email address we can use to verify your signup for this email address." So I can't have an email address unless I already have an email address. It's the most asinine thing permalink fedilink source parent [–] Ghoelian@piefed.social 0 points 18 hours ago E-mail based 2fa isn't good, but at least it's better than having no 2nd factor at all. permalink fedilink source parent [–] LodeMike@lemmy.today [S] 17 points 1 day ago (18 children) I don't want it for like 95% of the logins I have. permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 18 child comments replies: [–] Stormy@thelemmy.club 9 points 23 hours ago (17 children) Seriously. Why would i care if someone logs into most of them. What are they going to do watch a movie on my Netflix account, play my kids roblox games, or change my crew on my Rockstar account? It's unnecessary bs. permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 17 child comments replies: [–] farmgineer@nord.pub 25 points 23 hours ago (4 children) The bigger issue is gaining account details and personal info for identity theft. permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 4 child comments replies: [–] Stormy@thelemmy.club 10 points 23 hours ago* (1 child) Which also doesn't matter anymore because companies sell our data all the time or just give it away through their own data insecurities. Or yanno, white pages. com and similar exists and its pretty easy to find anything about anyone anytime. permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 1 child comment replies: [–] Ghoelian@piefed.social 2 points 18 hours ago They don't sell your ID or credit card information though, which is information a lot of these kinds of services have. permalink fedilink source parent [–] BillionaireStew@lemmy.world 1 point 1 hour ago* Who cares if someone steals your identity? Just go on the dark web and buy a new one. permalink fedilink source parent load more comments (1 reply) [–] urandom@lemmy.world 8 points 22 hours ago (6 children) Any account that does payment (like your netflix one), will be used to test out stolen credit cards. This will in turn flag your account for fraud. You might not want that. Unless you do, I don't know permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 6 child comments replies: [–] Stormy@thelemmy.club 3 points 22 hours ago (5 children) What? Like they'd try and use a stolen credit card to pay for my service? permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 5 child comments replies: [–] urandom@lemmy.world 2 points 21 hours ago (4 children) They won’t be paying, just tokenizing the cards to see if the data is good. permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 4 child comments replies: [–] Stormy@thelemmy.club 1 point 20 hours ago (3 children) Sounds like it wouldn't be a problem at all, for me, and really a problem for the police or netflix or the credit card company. permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 3 child comments replies: [–] Ghoelian@piefed.social 4 points 18 hours ago (2 children) It will be a problem for you when the police decide it's a civil issue (which they most likely will). Whether the credit card company will help you with this really depends on their policies, and I'm not sure what Netflix is supposed to do about it. permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 2 child comments replies: [–] Stormy@thelemmy.club 2 points 17 hours ago (1 child) If they said it was a civil issue, that'd mean no charges against me, which would be even better because then I could just make a different netflix account and have no legal issues. Idk man. I just don't think it's a big deal for me. permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 1 child comment replies: [–] Ghoelian@piefed.social 2 points 10 hours ago What? Yeah of course there are no charges against you, you are the victim in this situation. I misunderstood what this thread was about, I thought it was about someone stealing your credit card information from your Netflix account. permalink fedilink source parent [–] TheNamlessGuy@lemmy.world 2 points 12 hours ago They log into your netflix account, change email and password, and sell the account with your card still linked. Netflix support right out refuses to remove the card, or reimburse you for the remainder of the period you've paid for. I had to block netflix from my bank overall. I guess they don't want customers. (This was all right before they implemented 2FA) permalink fedilink source parent [–] kungen@feddit.nu 2 points 14 hours ago Well yeah, Netflix knows it's super annoying when your watch history gets messed up. This is the real reason why Netflix (and all the other tech companies) are suddenly pushing so hard for passkeys... it has nothing to do with how much control and influence it'll give them ;-) permalink fedilink source parent [–] halcyoncmdr@piefed.social 2 points 15 hours ago It's not about a specific account, it's about compromising your info. The info one company considers enough to verify you when you call or chat with customer service, another company will give out freely. They can then hop and skip through those to get access to one of your accounts they actually want. Your entire online security is only as secure as your most insecure account. permalink fedilink source parent [–] Axolotl_cpp@lemmy.dbzer0.com 1 point 11 hours ago* (1 child) Tell me that at least you use different email and password for every account because if not, then you just get screwed when they hack one account, also, if any of your social accounts gets hacked, it will for sure be used to scam or hack other people. permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 1 child comment replies: [–] Danquebec@sh.itjust.works 2 points 7 hours ago* I use the same password where it doesn't matter at all. I use different passwords where it matters or where my usual password doesn't work or was required to be changed. There are 3 things where I don't even save the password in a password manager. It stays in my wet memory. They are: Places where I store and move money. My email account. My password manager (duh). permalink fedilink source parent [–] FishFace@piefed.social 2 points 21 hours ago Almost all sites should allow me to choose whether I want 2fac. And they shouldn't prompt for it nearly as often as they do - some services do it for every login, most seem to do it every month at least. permalink fedilink source parent [–] RisingSwell@lemmy.dbzer0.com 3 points 19 hours ago My work 2fa can go away. I don't give two shits if everything in the work app is printed in global papers, just stop making me go through a 5 step process to see my fucking roster. permalink fedilink source parent [–] g8phcon2@k.fe.derate.me 2 points 23 hours ago (13 children) yes I do. I will take convivence over security most days. Just because you don't, and you have good reasons to want it to stay, doesn't mean everyone comes to the same conclusion based on similar data. permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 13 child comments replies: [–] dog@reddthat.com 16 points 23 hours ago Although I personally think 2FA is very important in most cases, I agree that mandatory 2FA is annoying. If you want to forego security for convenience, that should be up to you. I'm sure you're not stupid or ignorant of the risks. permalink fedilink source parent [–] g8phcon2@k.fe.derate.me 8 points 23 hours ago (5 children) As a user its annoying, as a developer it is incredibly frustrating and time consuming. permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 5 child comments replies: [–] Ghoelian@piefed.social 3 points 18 hours ago as a developer it is incredibly frustrating and time consuming Huh? How? Implementing OTP (which I'm assuming most people here are talking about) is pretty trivial, and once you have it set up, it doesn't require much maintenance. permalink fedilink source parent [–] marcos@lemmy.world 3 points 23 hours ago (3 children) It fails for somebody every day, it adds a dependency for a known unreliable 3rd party that often mangles the identification data it sends back, it is exploited by that 3rd party for extending their monopoly, and it gives that 3rd party (or any hacker that got access to them) full access to impersonate any user it wants. permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 3 child comments replies: [–] andyburke@kbin.earth 14 points 23 hours ago (2 children) What? Implement TOTP and let your users use their preferred authenticator and none of what you're struggling with will apply. permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 2 child comments replies: [–] marcos@lemmy.world 1 point 20 hours ago* (1 child) Oh, yeah, and of course there's someone on the internet talking about the MFA protocol that no corporation uses. That one is obligatory too. (Anyway, yes, if you need MFA, use TOTP. That's a non-brainier. Except that corporations don't have brains.) permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 1 child comment replies: [–] andyburke@kbin.earth 1 point 1 hour ago Amazon, Facebook, and many more support TOTP in whatever authenticator you want. I don't particularly like either of those websites but they are massive and directly contradict your claim that no corporation uses this normal method of 2FA. permalink fedilink source parent [–] voidsignal@lemmy.world 7 points 23 hours ago* (4 children) This is uterly idiotic but ok. I have decided I do not need to wear seat belt in the car. Just because you do and you have good reasons to want it to stay, doesn’t mean everyone comes to the same conclusion based on similar data. permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 4 child comments replies: [–] g8phcon2@k.fe.derate.me 0 points 21 hours ago (3 children) there, now you are getting it. permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 3 child comments replies: [–] baines@lemmy.cafe 3 points 22 hours ago (2 children) i dont want you not wearing the seatbelt, it is so easy to do we live in a society and im tired of paying for stupid doing stupid things permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 2 child comments replies: [–] Miaou@jlai.lu 4 points 21 hours ago (1 child) The day my taxes go towards paying for people who don't have 2fa, we can discuss whether it should be mandatory. Also, comparing a compromised Netflix account to loss of life, really? permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 1 child comment replies: [–] baines@lemmy.cafe 1 point 21 hours ago comparing cost to society there is a reason ms forces updates now permalink fedilink source parent [–] rockerface@lemmy.cafe 2 points 21 hours ago Good thing you aren't in charge of anything, then. permalink fedilink source parent
[–] drkt@scribe.disroot.org 73 points 1 day ago (2 children) I don't think the 2FA is the issue this comic is attempting to convey. permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 2 child comments replies: [–] urushitan@kakera.kintsugi.moe 12 points 21 hours ago (1 child) Except that it needs another jump for autofill 2fa permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 1 child comment replies: [–] Hal@piefed.nz 1 point 15 hours ago 2FA on the login form is a thing for some sites, permalink fedilink source parent
[–] urushitan@kakera.kintsugi.moe 12 points 21 hours ago (1 child) Except that it needs another jump for autofill 2fa permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 1 child comment replies: [–] Hal@piefed.nz 1 point 15 hours ago 2FA on the login form is a thing for some sites, permalink fedilink source parent
[–] Hal@piefed.nz 1 point 15 hours ago 2FA on the login form is a thing for some sites, permalink fedilink source parent
[–] Venator@lemmy.nz 60 points 23 hours ago* (8 children) Except when it's just an email, or worse, a txt message, or worse, a whatsapp message, with no other option for using a proper 2fa generator... But also, not every site needs 2fa, sometimes I really couldn't care less if someone managed to hack into something, because I can just make a new account if that happened... permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 8 child comments replies: [–] ilinamorato@lemmy.world 36 points 22 hours ago (6 children) What really bugs me is that TOTP is objectively easier than any other form of 2fa. Just import the library, add the field on your login form, and you're done. Email verification is annoying to code, it requires SMTP or an email gateway, is slow for the user, is risky from a security perspective, and to generate the code you probably still have to implement TOTP. SMS/RCS is even more annoying to code, it almost inevitably requires a third-party gateway, it can work differently if the user is in a different country or on a MVNO or in a low-signal area or just has the wrong astrological sign, is very slow for the end user, is almost useless from a security perspective, and you STILL have to implement TOTP. WhatsApp messages are somehow even more annoying to code than that, requires an api interaction with Meta (which is never fun and poorly documented), requires the end user to have an account with a specific third party, is slow for the end user, relies on another company's security posture to determine your own, and you STILL have to implement TOTP. Making your own app for 2fa is undoubtedly the worst: not only is it annoying to code, it's an ongoing annoyance that is strained through multiple app stores, adds an additional maintenance and support load, adds additional technical debt, adds an unnecessary attack vector, requires users to download another app, is often unreliable, is often pretty slow for the end user, is a total crapshoot from a security perspective, and guess what? YOU PROBABLY STILL HAVE TO IMPLEMENT TOTP. Any company that chooses SMS or email verification over TOTP emphatically does not know what they're doing. permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 6 child comments replies: [–] Venator@lemmy.nz 15 points 21 hours ago (1 child) 2fa by email is probably slightly easier than TOTP, if the account verification via email is already implemented, but yeah, it's not like it's significantly easier... permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 1 child comment replies: [–] ilinamorato@lemmy.world 5 points 21 hours ago* That is a fair point. But again, you probably have to implement TOTP or something like it anyway, to generate the code. permalink fedilink source parent [–] Miaou@jlai.lu 4 points 21 hours ago (2 children) You don't have to implement totp for these alternatives... The "thing" about totp is that there's a shared secret and a timestamp. Due to potential drift in clocks you need a window and period to know how many time steps to test, and how long each is. But with an email/SMS/WhatsApp, there's no shared secret. So you can simply send a random code, and store server side when it was generated. Totp makes no sense in that case. Not that totp is difficult to implement at all. My implementation for work was what, less than 200 lines of C++ I think? I didn't implement the sha1 myself though. permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 2 child comments replies: [–] ilinamorato@lemmy.world 2 points 20 hours ago An earlier version of that comment said "something like TOTP," but I guess I left that out while I was revising it. My point is you have to implement something that does most of what TOTP does anyway, so why not just use the version that's already been stress tested? permalink fedilink source parent [–] assa123@lemmy.world 1 point 8 hours ago You do have to implement TOTP, just not necessarily RFC 6238. Time-based one-time passwords require a shared secret, a shared time and a time-to-live. The shared secret is usually the key for generating the code, but can be the code itself. The shared time is still needed in mail authentication between the code generator and the code validator. The thing that's usually different is the time to live, but in RFC 6238 it is a parameter, so you can implement mail verification with it and a long TTL. permalink fedilink source parent [–] kungen@feddit.nu 3 points 15 hours ago The real reason is conversion. The majority of users aren't good at technology, so you risk them losing their TOTP secret. Then the user either just says "screw this site" and leaves, or they take time getting customer support to reset their key. So depending on the branch and customer base, it can often be much "cheaper" in the end to send login codes via email instead of using TOTP. permalink fedilink source parent [–] richardisaguy@lemmy.world 2 points 8 hours ago A local marketplace service in brazil only allows me to login using whatsapp codes or sms. When i enter the passowrd they ask for a whatsapp code permalink fedilink source parent
[–] ilinamorato@lemmy.world 36 points 22 hours ago (6 children) What really bugs me is that TOTP is objectively easier than any other form of 2fa. Just import the library, add the field on your login form, and you're done. Email verification is annoying to code, it requires SMTP or an email gateway, is slow for the user, is risky from a security perspective, and to generate the code you probably still have to implement TOTP. SMS/RCS is even more annoying to code, it almost inevitably requires a third-party gateway, it can work differently if the user is in a different country or on a MVNO or in a low-signal area or just has the wrong astrological sign, is very slow for the end user, is almost useless from a security perspective, and you STILL have to implement TOTP. WhatsApp messages are somehow even more annoying to code than that, requires an api interaction with Meta (which is never fun and poorly documented), requires the end user to have an account with a specific third party, is slow for the end user, relies on another company's security posture to determine your own, and you STILL have to implement TOTP. Making your own app for 2fa is undoubtedly the worst: not only is it annoying to code, it's an ongoing annoyance that is strained through multiple app stores, adds an additional maintenance and support load, adds additional technical debt, adds an unnecessary attack vector, requires users to download another app, is often unreliable, is often pretty slow for the end user, is a total crapshoot from a security perspective, and guess what? YOU PROBABLY STILL HAVE TO IMPLEMENT TOTP. Any company that chooses SMS or email verification over TOTP emphatically does not know what they're doing. permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 6 child comments replies: [–] Venator@lemmy.nz 15 points 21 hours ago (1 child) 2fa by email is probably slightly easier than TOTP, if the account verification via email is already implemented, but yeah, it's not like it's significantly easier... permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 1 child comment replies: [–] ilinamorato@lemmy.world 5 points 21 hours ago* That is a fair point. But again, you probably have to implement TOTP or something like it anyway, to generate the code. permalink fedilink source parent [–] Miaou@jlai.lu 4 points 21 hours ago (2 children) You don't have to implement totp for these alternatives... The "thing" about totp is that there's a shared secret and a timestamp. Due to potential drift in clocks you need a window and period to know how many time steps to test, and how long each is. But with an email/SMS/WhatsApp, there's no shared secret. So you can simply send a random code, and store server side when it was generated. Totp makes no sense in that case. Not that totp is difficult to implement at all. My implementation for work was what, less than 200 lines of C++ I think? I didn't implement the sha1 myself though. permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 2 child comments replies: [–] ilinamorato@lemmy.world 2 points 20 hours ago An earlier version of that comment said "something like TOTP," but I guess I left that out while I was revising it. My point is you have to implement something that does most of what TOTP does anyway, so why not just use the version that's already been stress tested? permalink fedilink source parent [–] assa123@lemmy.world 1 point 8 hours ago You do have to implement TOTP, just not necessarily RFC 6238. Time-based one-time passwords require a shared secret, a shared time and a time-to-live. The shared secret is usually the key for generating the code, but can be the code itself. The shared time is still needed in mail authentication between the code generator and the code validator. The thing that's usually different is the time to live, but in RFC 6238 it is a parameter, so you can implement mail verification with it and a long TTL. permalink fedilink source parent [–] kungen@feddit.nu 3 points 15 hours ago The real reason is conversion. The majority of users aren't good at technology, so you risk them losing their TOTP secret. Then the user either just says "screw this site" and leaves, or they take time getting customer support to reset their key. So depending on the branch and customer base, it can often be much "cheaper" in the end to send login codes via email instead of using TOTP. permalink fedilink source parent
[–] Venator@lemmy.nz 15 points 21 hours ago (1 child) 2fa by email is probably slightly easier than TOTP, if the account verification via email is already implemented, but yeah, it's not like it's significantly easier... permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 1 child comment replies: [–] ilinamorato@lemmy.world 5 points 21 hours ago* That is a fair point. But again, you probably have to implement TOTP or something like it anyway, to generate the code. permalink fedilink source parent
[–] ilinamorato@lemmy.world 5 points 21 hours ago* That is a fair point. But again, you probably have to implement TOTP or something like it anyway, to generate the code. permalink fedilink source parent
[–] Miaou@jlai.lu 4 points 21 hours ago (2 children) You don't have to implement totp for these alternatives... The "thing" about totp is that there's a shared secret and a timestamp. Due to potential drift in clocks you need a window and period to know how many time steps to test, and how long each is. But with an email/SMS/WhatsApp, there's no shared secret. So you can simply send a random code, and store server side when it was generated. Totp makes no sense in that case. Not that totp is difficult to implement at all. My implementation for work was what, less than 200 lines of C++ I think? I didn't implement the sha1 myself though. permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 2 child comments replies: [–] ilinamorato@lemmy.world 2 points 20 hours ago An earlier version of that comment said "something like TOTP," but I guess I left that out while I was revising it. My point is you have to implement something that does most of what TOTP does anyway, so why not just use the version that's already been stress tested? permalink fedilink source parent [–] assa123@lemmy.world 1 point 8 hours ago You do have to implement TOTP, just not necessarily RFC 6238. Time-based one-time passwords require a shared secret, a shared time and a time-to-live. The shared secret is usually the key for generating the code, but can be the code itself. The shared time is still needed in mail authentication between the code generator and the code validator. The thing that's usually different is the time to live, but in RFC 6238 it is a parameter, so you can implement mail verification with it and a long TTL. permalink fedilink source parent
[–] ilinamorato@lemmy.world 2 points 20 hours ago An earlier version of that comment said "something like TOTP," but I guess I left that out while I was revising it. My point is you have to implement something that does most of what TOTP does anyway, so why not just use the version that's already been stress tested? permalink fedilink source parent
[–] assa123@lemmy.world 1 point 8 hours ago You do have to implement TOTP, just not necessarily RFC 6238. Time-based one-time passwords require a shared secret, a shared time and a time-to-live. The shared secret is usually the key for generating the code, but can be the code itself. The shared time is still needed in mail authentication between the code generator and the code validator. The thing that's usually different is the time to live, but in RFC 6238 it is a parameter, so you can implement mail verification with it and a long TTL. permalink fedilink source parent
[–] kungen@feddit.nu 3 points 15 hours ago The real reason is conversion. The majority of users aren't good at technology, so you risk them losing their TOTP secret. Then the user either just says "screw this site" and leaves, or they take time getting customer support to reset their key. So depending on the branch and customer base, it can often be much "cheaper" in the end to send login codes via email instead of using TOTP. permalink fedilink source parent
[–] richardisaguy@lemmy.world 2 points 8 hours ago A local marketplace service in brazil only allows me to login using whatsapp codes or sms. When i enter the passowrd they ask for a whatsapp code permalink fedilink source parent
[–] CanadaPlus@lemmy.sdf.org 4 points 23 hours ago* (2 children) I get the theory, but if it itself relies on some login-based service (like email) it becomes a kind of chicken and egg problem. permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 2 child comments replies: [–] whelk@retrolemmy.com 2 points 19 hours ago Reminds me of all the times I've run into "Please provide another email address we can use to verify your signup for this email address." So I can't have an email address unless I already have an email address. It's the most asinine thing permalink fedilink source parent [–] Ghoelian@piefed.social 0 points 18 hours ago E-mail based 2fa isn't good, but at least it's better than having no 2nd factor at all. permalink fedilink source parent
[–] whelk@retrolemmy.com 2 points 19 hours ago Reminds me of all the times I've run into "Please provide another email address we can use to verify your signup for this email address." So I can't have an email address unless I already have an email address. It's the most asinine thing permalink fedilink source parent
[–] Ghoelian@piefed.social 0 points 18 hours ago E-mail based 2fa isn't good, but at least it's better than having no 2nd factor at all. permalink fedilink source parent
[–] LodeMike@lemmy.today [S] 17 points 1 day ago (18 children) I don't want it for like 95% of the logins I have. permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 18 child comments replies: [–] Stormy@thelemmy.club 9 points 23 hours ago (17 children) Seriously. Why would i care if someone logs into most of them. What are they going to do watch a movie on my Netflix account, play my kids roblox games, or change my crew on my Rockstar account? It's unnecessary bs. permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 17 child comments replies: [–] farmgineer@nord.pub 25 points 23 hours ago (4 children) The bigger issue is gaining account details and personal info for identity theft. permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 4 child comments replies: [–] Stormy@thelemmy.club 10 points 23 hours ago* (1 child) Which also doesn't matter anymore because companies sell our data all the time or just give it away through their own data insecurities. Or yanno, white pages. com and similar exists and its pretty easy to find anything about anyone anytime. permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 1 child comment replies: [–] Ghoelian@piefed.social 2 points 18 hours ago They don't sell your ID or credit card information though, which is information a lot of these kinds of services have. permalink fedilink source parent [–] BillionaireStew@lemmy.world 1 point 1 hour ago* Who cares if someone steals your identity? Just go on the dark web and buy a new one. permalink fedilink source parent load more comments (1 reply) [–] urandom@lemmy.world 8 points 22 hours ago (6 children) Any account that does payment (like your netflix one), will be used to test out stolen credit cards. This will in turn flag your account for fraud. You might not want that. Unless you do, I don't know permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 6 child comments replies: [–] Stormy@thelemmy.club 3 points 22 hours ago (5 children) What? Like they'd try and use a stolen credit card to pay for my service? permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 5 child comments replies: [–] urandom@lemmy.world 2 points 21 hours ago (4 children) They won’t be paying, just tokenizing the cards to see if the data is good. permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 4 child comments replies: [–] Stormy@thelemmy.club 1 point 20 hours ago (3 children) Sounds like it wouldn't be a problem at all, for me, and really a problem for the police or netflix or the credit card company. permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 3 child comments replies: [–] Ghoelian@piefed.social 4 points 18 hours ago (2 children) It will be a problem for you when the police decide it's a civil issue (which they most likely will). Whether the credit card company will help you with this really depends on their policies, and I'm not sure what Netflix is supposed to do about it. permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 2 child comments replies: [–] Stormy@thelemmy.club 2 points 17 hours ago (1 child) If they said it was a civil issue, that'd mean no charges against me, which would be even better because then I could just make a different netflix account and have no legal issues. Idk man. I just don't think it's a big deal for me. permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 1 child comment replies: [–] Ghoelian@piefed.social 2 points 10 hours ago What? Yeah of course there are no charges against you, you are the victim in this situation. I misunderstood what this thread was about, I thought it was about someone stealing your credit card information from your Netflix account. permalink fedilink source parent [–] TheNamlessGuy@lemmy.world 2 points 12 hours ago They log into your netflix account, change email and password, and sell the account with your card still linked. Netflix support right out refuses to remove the card, or reimburse you for the remainder of the period you've paid for. I had to block netflix from my bank overall. I guess they don't want customers. (This was all right before they implemented 2FA) permalink fedilink source parent [–] kungen@feddit.nu 2 points 14 hours ago Well yeah, Netflix knows it's super annoying when your watch history gets messed up. This is the real reason why Netflix (and all the other tech companies) are suddenly pushing so hard for passkeys... it has nothing to do with how much control and influence it'll give them ;-) permalink fedilink source parent [–] halcyoncmdr@piefed.social 2 points 15 hours ago It's not about a specific account, it's about compromising your info. The info one company considers enough to verify you when you call or chat with customer service, another company will give out freely. They can then hop and skip through those to get access to one of your accounts they actually want. Your entire online security is only as secure as your most insecure account. permalink fedilink source parent [–] Axolotl_cpp@lemmy.dbzer0.com 1 point 11 hours ago* (1 child) Tell me that at least you use different email and password for every account because if not, then you just get screwed when they hack one account, also, if any of your social accounts gets hacked, it will for sure be used to scam or hack other people. permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 1 child comment replies: [–] Danquebec@sh.itjust.works 2 points 7 hours ago* I use the same password where it doesn't matter at all. I use different passwords where it matters or where my usual password doesn't work or was required to be changed. There are 3 things where I don't even save the password in a password manager. It stays in my wet memory. They are: Places where I store and move money. My email account. My password manager (duh). permalink fedilink source parent
[–] Stormy@thelemmy.club 9 points 23 hours ago (17 children) Seriously. Why would i care if someone logs into most of them. What are they going to do watch a movie on my Netflix account, play my kids roblox games, or change my crew on my Rockstar account? It's unnecessary bs. permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 17 child comments replies: [–] farmgineer@nord.pub 25 points 23 hours ago (4 children) The bigger issue is gaining account details and personal info for identity theft. permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 4 child comments replies: [–] Stormy@thelemmy.club 10 points 23 hours ago* (1 child) Which also doesn't matter anymore because companies sell our data all the time or just give it away through their own data insecurities. Or yanno, white pages. com and similar exists and its pretty easy to find anything about anyone anytime. permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 1 child comment replies: [–] Ghoelian@piefed.social 2 points 18 hours ago They don't sell your ID or credit card information though, which is information a lot of these kinds of services have. permalink fedilink source parent [–] BillionaireStew@lemmy.world 1 point 1 hour ago* Who cares if someone steals your identity? Just go on the dark web and buy a new one. permalink fedilink source parent load more comments (1 reply) [–] urandom@lemmy.world 8 points 22 hours ago (6 children) Any account that does payment (like your netflix one), will be used to test out stolen credit cards. This will in turn flag your account for fraud. You might not want that. Unless you do, I don't know permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 6 child comments replies: [–] Stormy@thelemmy.club 3 points 22 hours ago (5 children) What? Like they'd try and use a stolen credit card to pay for my service? permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 5 child comments replies: [–] urandom@lemmy.world 2 points 21 hours ago (4 children) They won’t be paying, just tokenizing the cards to see if the data is good. permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 4 child comments replies: [–] Stormy@thelemmy.club 1 point 20 hours ago (3 children) Sounds like it wouldn't be a problem at all, for me, and really a problem for the police or netflix or the credit card company. permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 3 child comments replies: [–] Ghoelian@piefed.social 4 points 18 hours ago (2 children) It will be a problem for you when the police decide it's a civil issue (which they most likely will). Whether the credit card company will help you with this really depends on their policies, and I'm not sure what Netflix is supposed to do about it. permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 2 child comments replies: [–] Stormy@thelemmy.club 2 points 17 hours ago (1 child) If they said it was a civil issue, that'd mean no charges against me, which would be even better because then I could just make a different netflix account and have no legal issues. Idk man. I just don't think it's a big deal for me. permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 1 child comment replies: [–] Ghoelian@piefed.social 2 points 10 hours ago What? Yeah of course there are no charges against you, you are the victim in this situation. I misunderstood what this thread was about, I thought it was about someone stealing your credit card information from your Netflix account. permalink fedilink source parent [–] TheNamlessGuy@lemmy.world 2 points 12 hours ago They log into your netflix account, change email and password, and sell the account with your card still linked. Netflix support right out refuses to remove the card, or reimburse you for the remainder of the period you've paid for. I had to block netflix from my bank overall. I guess they don't want customers. (This was all right before they implemented 2FA) permalink fedilink source parent [–] kungen@feddit.nu 2 points 14 hours ago Well yeah, Netflix knows it's super annoying when your watch history gets messed up. This is the real reason why Netflix (and all the other tech companies) are suddenly pushing so hard for passkeys... it has nothing to do with how much control and influence it'll give them ;-) permalink fedilink source parent [–] halcyoncmdr@piefed.social 2 points 15 hours ago It's not about a specific account, it's about compromising your info. The info one company considers enough to verify you when you call or chat with customer service, another company will give out freely. They can then hop and skip through those to get access to one of your accounts they actually want. Your entire online security is only as secure as your most insecure account. permalink fedilink source parent [–] Axolotl_cpp@lemmy.dbzer0.com 1 point 11 hours ago* (1 child) Tell me that at least you use different email and password for every account because if not, then you just get screwed when they hack one account, also, if any of your social accounts gets hacked, it will for sure be used to scam or hack other people. permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 1 child comment replies: [–] Danquebec@sh.itjust.works 2 points 7 hours ago* I use the same password where it doesn't matter at all. I use different passwords where it matters or where my usual password doesn't work or was required to be changed. There are 3 things where I don't even save the password in a password manager. It stays in my wet memory. They are: Places where I store and move money. My email account. My password manager (duh). permalink fedilink source parent
[–] farmgineer@nord.pub 25 points 23 hours ago (4 children) The bigger issue is gaining account details and personal info for identity theft. permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 4 child comments replies: [–] Stormy@thelemmy.club 10 points 23 hours ago* (1 child) Which also doesn't matter anymore because companies sell our data all the time or just give it away through their own data insecurities. Or yanno, white pages. com and similar exists and its pretty easy to find anything about anyone anytime. permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 1 child comment replies: [–] Ghoelian@piefed.social 2 points 18 hours ago They don't sell your ID or credit card information though, which is information a lot of these kinds of services have. permalink fedilink source parent [–] BillionaireStew@lemmy.world 1 point 1 hour ago* Who cares if someone steals your identity? Just go on the dark web and buy a new one. permalink fedilink source parent load more comments (1 reply)
[–] Stormy@thelemmy.club 10 points 23 hours ago* (1 child) Which also doesn't matter anymore because companies sell our data all the time or just give it away through their own data insecurities. Or yanno, white pages. com and similar exists and its pretty easy to find anything about anyone anytime. permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 1 child comment replies: [–] Ghoelian@piefed.social 2 points 18 hours ago They don't sell your ID or credit card information though, which is information a lot of these kinds of services have. permalink fedilink source parent
[–] Ghoelian@piefed.social 2 points 18 hours ago They don't sell your ID or credit card information though, which is information a lot of these kinds of services have. permalink fedilink source parent
[–] BillionaireStew@lemmy.world 1 point 1 hour ago* Who cares if someone steals your identity? Just go on the dark web and buy a new one. permalink fedilink source parent
[–] urandom@lemmy.world 8 points 22 hours ago (6 children) Any account that does payment (like your netflix one), will be used to test out stolen credit cards. This will in turn flag your account for fraud. You might not want that. Unless you do, I don't know permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 6 child comments replies: [–] Stormy@thelemmy.club 3 points 22 hours ago (5 children) What? Like they'd try and use a stolen credit card to pay for my service? permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 5 child comments replies: [–] urandom@lemmy.world 2 points 21 hours ago (4 children) They won’t be paying, just tokenizing the cards to see if the data is good. permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 4 child comments replies: [–] Stormy@thelemmy.club 1 point 20 hours ago (3 children) Sounds like it wouldn't be a problem at all, for me, and really a problem for the police or netflix or the credit card company. permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 3 child comments replies: [–] Ghoelian@piefed.social 4 points 18 hours ago (2 children) It will be a problem for you when the police decide it's a civil issue (which they most likely will). Whether the credit card company will help you with this really depends on their policies, and I'm not sure what Netflix is supposed to do about it. permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 2 child comments replies: [–] Stormy@thelemmy.club 2 points 17 hours ago (1 child) If they said it was a civil issue, that'd mean no charges against me, which would be even better because then I could just make a different netflix account and have no legal issues. Idk man. I just don't think it's a big deal for me. permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 1 child comment replies: [–] Ghoelian@piefed.social 2 points 10 hours ago What? Yeah of course there are no charges against you, you are the victim in this situation. I misunderstood what this thread was about, I thought it was about someone stealing your credit card information from your Netflix account. permalink fedilink source parent
[–] Stormy@thelemmy.club 3 points 22 hours ago (5 children) What? Like they'd try and use a stolen credit card to pay for my service? permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 5 child comments replies: [–] urandom@lemmy.world 2 points 21 hours ago (4 children) They won’t be paying, just tokenizing the cards to see if the data is good. permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 4 child comments replies: [–] Stormy@thelemmy.club 1 point 20 hours ago (3 children) Sounds like it wouldn't be a problem at all, for me, and really a problem for the police or netflix or the credit card company. permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 3 child comments replies: [–] Ghoelian@piefed.social 4 points 18 hours ago (2 children) It will be a problem for you when the police decide it's a civil issue (which they most likely will). Whether the credit card company will help you with this really depends on their policies, and I'm not sure what Netflix is supposed to do about it. permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 2 child comments replies: [–] Stormy@thelemmy.club 2 points 17 hours ago (1 child) If they said it was a civil issue, that'd mean no charges against me, which would be even better because then I could just make a different netflix account and have no legal issues. Idk man. I just don't think it's a big deal for me. permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 1 child comment replies: [–] Ghoelian@piefed.social 2 points 10 hours ago What? Yeah of course there are no charges against you, you are the victim in this situation. I misunderstood what this thread was about, I thought it was about someone stealing your credit card information from your Netflix account. permalink fedilink source parent
[–] urandom@lemmy.world 2 points 21 hours ago (4 children) They won’t be paying, just tokenizing the cards to see if the data is good. permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 4 child comments replies: [–] Stormy@thelemmy.club 1 point 20 hours ago (3 children) Sounds like it wouldn't be a problem at all, for me, and really a problem for the police or netflix or the credit card company. permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 3 child comments replies: [–] Ghoelian@piefed.social 4 points 18 hours ago (2 children) It will be a problem for you when the police decide it's a civil issue (which they most likely will). Whether the credit card company will help you with this really depends on their policies, and I'm not sure what Netflix is supposed to do about it. permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 2 child comments replies: [–] Stormy@thelemmy.club 2 points 17 hours ago (1 child) If they said it was a civil issue, that'd mean no charges against me, which would be even better because then I could just make a different netflix account and have no legal issues. Idk man. I just don't think it's a big deal for me. permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 1 child comment replies: [–] Ghoelian@piefed.social 2 points 10 hours ago What? Yeah of course there are no charges against you, you are the victim in this situation. I misunderstood what this thread was about, I thought it was about someone stealing your credit card information from your Netflix account. permalink fedilink source parent
[–] Stormy@thelemmy.club 1 point 20 hours ago (3 children) Sounds like it wouldn't be a problem at all, for me, and really a problem for the police or netflix or the credit card company. permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 3 child comments replies: [–] Ghoelian@piefed.social 4 points 18 hours ago (2 children) It will be a problem for you when the police decide it's a civil issue (which they most likely will). Whether the credit card company will help you with this really depends on their policies, and I'm not sure what Netflix is supposed to do about it. permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 2 child comments replies: [–] Stormy@thelemmy.club 2 points 17 hours ago (1 child) If they said it was a civil issue, that'd mean no charges against me, which would be even better because then I could just make a different netflix account and have no legal issues. Idk man. I just don't think it's a big deal for me. permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 1 child comment replies: [–] Ghoelian@piefed.social 2 points 10 hours ago What? Yeah of course there are no charges against you, you are the victim in this situation. I misunderstood what this thread was about, I thought it was about someone stealing your credit card information from your Netflix account. permalink fedilink source parent
[–] Ghoelian@piefed.social 4 points 18 hours ago (2 children) It will be a problem for you when the police decide it's a civil issue (which they most likely will). Whether the credit card company will help you with this really depends on their policies, and I'm not sure what Netflix is supposed to do about it. permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 2 child comments replies: [–] Stormy@thelemmy.club 2 points 17 hours ago (1 child) If they said it was a civil issue, that'd mean no charges against me, which would be even better because then I could just make a different netflix account and have no legal issues. Idk man. I just don't think it's a big deal for me. permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 1 child comment replies: [–] Ghoelian@piefed.social 2 points 10 hours ago What? Yeah of course there are no charges against you, you are the victim in this situation. I misunderstood what this thread was about, I thought it was about someone stealing your credit card information from your Netflix account. permalink fedilink source parent
[–] Stormy@thelemmy.club 2 points 17 hours ago (1 child) If they said it was a civil issue, that'd mean no charges against me, which would be even better because then I could just make a different netflix account and have no legal issues. Idk man. I just don't think it's a big deal for me. permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 1 child comment replies: [–] Ghoelian@piefed.social 2 points 10 hours ago What? Yeah of course there are no charges against you, you are the victim in this situation. I misunderstood what this thread was about, I thought it was about someone stealing your credit card information from your Netflix account. permalink fedilink source parent
[–] Ghoelian@piefed.social 2 points 10 hours ago What? Yeah of course there are no charges against you, you are the victim in this situation. I misunderstood what this thread was about, I thought it was about someone stealing your credit card information from your Netflix account. permalink fedilink source parent
[–] TheNamlessGuy@lemmy.world 2 points 12 hours ago They log into your netflix account, change email and password, and sell the account with your card still linked. Netflix support right out refuses to remove the card, or reimburse you for the remainder of the period you've paid for. I had to block netflix from my bank overall. I guess they don't want customers. (This was all right before they implemented 2FA) permalink fedilink source parent
[–] kungen@feddit.nu 2 points 14 hours ago Well yeah, Netflix knows it's super annoying when your watch history gets messed up. This is the real reason why Netflix (and all the other tech companies) are suddenly pushing so hard for passkeys... it has nothing to do with how much control and influence it'll give them ;-) permalink fedilink source parent
[–] halcyoncmdr@piefed.social 2 points 15 hours ago It's not about a specific account, it's about compromising your info. The info one company considers enough to verify you when you call or chat with customer service, another company will give out freely. They can then hop and skip through those to get access to one of your accounts they actually want. Your entire online security is only as secure as your most insecure account. permalink fedilink source parent
[–] Axolotl_cpp@lemmy.dbzer0.com 1 point 11 hours ago* (1 child) Tell me that at least you use different email and password for every account because if not, then you just get screwed when they hack one account, also, if any of your social accounts gets hacked, it will for sure be used to scam or hack other people. permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 1 child comment replies: [–] Danquebec@sh.itjust.works 2 points 7 hours ago* I use the same password where it doesn't matter at all. I use different passwords where it matters or where my usual password doesn't work or was required to be changed. There are 3 things where I don't even save the password in a password manager. It stays in my wet memory. They are: Places where I store and move money. My email account. My password manager (duh). permalink fedilink source parent
[–] Danquebec@sh.itjust.works 2 points 7 hours ago* I use the same password where it doesn't matter at all. I use different passwords where it matters or where my usual password doesn't work or was required to be changed. There are 3 things where I don't even save the password in a password manager. It stays in my wet memory. They are: Places where I store and move money. My email account. My password manager (duh). permalink fedilink source parent
[–] FishFace@piefed.social 2 points 21 hours ago Almost all sites should allow me to choose whether I want 2fac. And they shouldn't prompt for it nearly as often as they do - some services do it for every login, most seem to do it every month at least. permalink fedilink source parent
[–] RisingSwell@lemmy.dbzer0.com 3 points 19 hours ago My work 2fa can go away. I don't give two shits if everything in the work app is printed in global papers, just stop making me go through a 5 step process to see my fucking roster. permalink fedilink source parent
[–] g8phcon2@k.fe.derate.me 2 points 23 hours ago (13 children) yes I do. I will take convivence over security most days. Just because you don't, and you have good reasons to want it to stay, doesn't mean everyone comes to the same conclusion based on similar data. permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 13 child comments replies: [–] dog@reddthat.com 16 points 23 hours ago Although I personally think 2FA is very important in most cases, I agree that mandatory 2FA is annoying. If you want to forego security for convenience, that should be up to you. I'm sure you're not stupid or ignorant of the risks. permalink fedilink source parent [–] g8phcon2@k.fe.derate.me 8 points 23 hours ago (5 children) As a user its annoying, as a developer it is incredibly frustrating and time consuming. permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 5 child comments replies: [–] Ghoelian@piefed.social 3 points 18 hours ago as a developer it is incredibly frustrating and time consuming Huh? How? Implementing OTP (which I'm assuming most people here are talking about) is pretty trivial, and once you have it set up, it doesn't require much maintenance. permalink fedilink source parent [–] marcos@lemmy.world 3 points 23 hours ago (3 children) It fails for somebody every day, it adds a dependency for a known unreliable 3rd party that often mangles the identification data it sends back, it is exploited by that 3rd party for extending their monopoly, and it gives that 3rd party (or any hacker that got access to them) full access to impersonate any user it wants. permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 3 child comments replies: [–] andyburke@kbin.earth 14 points 23 hours ago (2 children) What? Implement TOTP and let your users use their preferred authenticator and none of what you're struggling with will apply. permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 2 child comments replies: [–] marcos@lemmy.world 1 point 20 hours ago* (1 child) Oh, yeah, and of course there's someone on the internet talking about the MFA protocol that no corporation uses. That one is obligatory too. (Anyway, yes, if you need MFA, use TOTP. That's a non-brainier. Except that corporations don't have brains.) permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 1 child comment replies: [–] andyburke@kbin.earth 1 point 1 hour ago Amazon, Facebook, and many more support TOTP in whatever authenticator you want. I don't particularly like either of those websites but they are massive and directly contradict your claim that no corporation uses this normal method of 2FA. permalink fedilink source parent [–] voidsignal@lemmy.world 7 points 23 hours ago* (4 children) This is uterly idiotic but ok. I have decided I do not need to wear seat belt in the car. Just because you do and you have good reasons to want it to stay, doesn’t mean everyone comes to the same conclusion based on similar data. permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 4 child comments replies: [–] g8phcon2@k.fe.derate.me 0 points 21 hours ago (3 children) there, now you are getting it. permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 3 child comments replies: [–] baines@lemmy.cafe 3 points 22 hours ago (2 children) i dont want you not wearing the seatbelt, it is so easy to do we live in a society and im tired of paying for stupid doing stupid things permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 2 child comments replies: [–] Miaou@jlai.lu 4 points 21 hours ago (1 child) The day my taxes go towards paying for people who don't have 2fa, we can discuss whether it should be mandatory. Also, comparing a compromised Netflix account to loss of life, really? permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 1 child comment replies: [–] baines@lemmy.cafe 1 point 21 hours ago comparing cost to society there is a reason ms forces updates now permalink fedilink source parent [–] rockerface@lemmy.cafe 2 points 21 hours ago Good thing you aren't in charge of anything, then. permalink fedilink source parent
[–] dog@reddthat.com 16 points 23 hours ago Although I personally think 2FA is very important in most cases, I agree that mandatory 2FA is annoying. If you want to forego security for convenience, that should be up to you. I'm sure you're not stupid or ignorant of the risks. permalink fedilink source parent
[–] g8phcon2@k.fe.derate.me 8 points 23 hours ago (5 children) As a user its annoying, as a developer it is incredibly frustrating and time consuming. permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 5 child comments replies: [–] Ghoelian@piefed.social 3 points 18 hours ago as a developer it is incredibly frustrating and time consuming Huh? How? Implementing OTP (which I'm assuming most people here are talking about) is pretty trivial, and once you have it set up, it doesn't require much maintenance. permalink fedilink source parent [–] marcos@lemmy.world 3 points 23 hours ago (3 children) It fails for somebody every day, it adds a dependency for a known unreliable 3rd party that often mangles the identification data it sends back, it is exploited by that 3rd party for extending their monopoly, and it gives that 3rd party (or any hacker that got access to them) full access to impersonate any user it wants. permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 3 child comments replies: [–] andyburke@kbin.earth 14 points 23 hours ago (2 children) What? Implement TOTP and let your users use their preferred authenticator and none of what you're struggling with will apply. permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 2 child comments replies: [–] marcos@lemmy.world 1 point 20 hours ago* (1 child) Oh, yeah, and of course there's someone on the internet talking about the MFA protocol that no corporation uses. That one is obligatory too. (Anyway, yes, if you need MFA, use TOTP. That's a non-brainier. Except that corporations don't have brains.) permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 1 child comment replies: [–] andyburke@kbin.earth 1 point 1 hour ago Amazon, Facebook, and many more support TOTP in whatever authenticator you want. I don't particularly like either of those websites but they are massive and directly contradict your claim that no corporation uses this normal method of 2FA. permalink fedilink source parent
[–] Ghoelian@piefed.social 3 points 18 hours ago as a developer it is incredibly frustrating and time consuming Huh? How? Implementing OTP (which I'm assuming most people here are talking about) is pretty trivial, and once you have it set up, it doesn't require much maintenance. permalink fedilink source parent
[–] marcos@lemmy.world 3 points 23 hours ago (3 children) It fails for somebody every day, it adds a dependency for a known unreliable 3rd party that often mangles the identification data it sends back, it is exploited by that 3rd party for extending their monopoly, and it gives that 3rd party (or any hacker that got access to them) full access to impersonate any user it wants. permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 3 child comments replies: [–] andyburke@kbin.earth 14 points 23 hours ago (2 children) What? Implement TOTP and let your users use their preferred authenticator and none of what you're struggling with will apply. permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 2 child comments replies: [–] marcos@lemmy.world 1 point 20 hours ago* (1 child) Oh, yeah, and of course there's someone on the internet talking about the MFA protocol that no corporation uses. That one is obligatory too. (Anyway, yes, if you need MFA, use TOTP. That's a non-brainier. Except that corporations don't have brains.) permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 1 child comment replies: [–] andyburke@kbin.earth 1 point 1 hour ago Amazon, Facebook, and many more support TOTP in whatever authenticator you want. I don't particularly like either of those websites but they are massive and directly contradict your claim that no corporation uses this normal method of 2FA. permalink fedilink source parent
[–] andyburke@kbin.earth 14 points 23 hours ago (2 children) What? Implement TOTP and let your users use their preferred authenticator and none of what you're struggling with will apply. permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 2 child comments replies: [–] marcos@lemmy.world 1 point 20 hours ago* (1 child) Oh, yeah, and of course there's someone on the internet talking about the MFA protocol that no corporation uses. That one is obligatory too. (Anyway, yes, if you need MFA, use TOTP. That's a non-brainier. Except that corporations don't have brains.) permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 1 child comment replies: [–] andyburke@kbin.earth 1 point 1 hour ago Amazon, Facebook, and many more support TOTP in whatever authenticator you want. I don't particularly like either of those websites but they are massive and directly contradict your claim that no corporation uses this normal method of 2FA. permalink fedilink source parent
[–] marcos@lemmy.world 1 point 20 hours ago* (1 child) Oh, yeah, and of course there's someone on the internet talking about the MFA protocol that no corporation uses. That one is obligatory too. (Anyway, yes, if you need MFA, use TOTP. That's a non-brainier. Except that corporations don't have brains.) permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 1 child comment replies: [–] andyburke@kbin.earth 1 point 1 hour ago Amazon, Facebook, and many more support TOTP in whatever authenticator you want. I don't particularly like either of those websites but they are massive and directly contradict your claim that no corporation uses this normal method of 2FA. permalink fedilink source parent
[–] andyburke@kbin.earth 1 point 1 hour ago Amazon, Facebook, and many more support TOTP in whatever authenticator you want. I don't particularly like either of those websites but they are massive and directly contradict your claim that no corporation uses this normal method of 2FA. permalink fedilink source parent
[–] voidsignal@lemmy.world 7 points 23 hours ago* (4 children) This is uterly idiotic but ok. I have decided I do not need to wear seat belt in the car. Just because you do and you have good reasons to want it to stay, doesn’t mean everyone comes to the same conclusion based on similar data. permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 4 child comments replies: [–] g8phcon2@k.fe.derate.me 0 points 21 hours ago (3 children) there, now you are getting it. permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 3 child comments replies: [–] baines@lemmy.cafe 3 points 22 hours ago (2 children) i dont want you not wearing the seatbelt, it is so easy to do we live in a society and im tired of paying for stupid doing stupid things permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 2 child comments replies: [–] Miaou@jlai.lu 4 points 21 hours ago (1 child) The day my taxes go towards paying for people who don't have 2fa, we can discuss whether it should be mandatory. Also, comparing a compromised Netflix account to loss of life, really? permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 1 child comment replies: [–] baines@lemmy.cafe 1 point 21 hours ago comparing cost to society there is a reason ms forces updates now permalink fedilink source parent
[–] g8phcon2@k.fe.derate.me 0 points 21 hours ago (3 children) there, now you are getting it. permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 3 child comments replies: [–] baines@lemmy.cafe 3 points 22 hours ago (2 children) i dont want you not wearing the seatbelt, it is so easy to do we live in a society and im tired of paying for stupid doing stupid things permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 2 child comments replies: [–] Miaou@jlai.lu 4 points 21 hours ago (1 child) The day my taxes go towards paying for people who don't have 2fa, we can discuss whether it should be mandatory. Also, comparing a compromised Netflix account to loss of life, really? permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 1 child comment replies: [–] baines@lemmy.cafe 1 point 21 hours ago comparing cost to society there is a reason ms forces updates now permalink fedilink source parent
[–] baines@lemmy.cafe 3 points 22 hours ago (2 children) i dont want you not wearing the seatbelt, it is so easy to do we live in a society and im tired of paying for stupid doing stupid things permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 2 child comments replies: [–] Miaou@jlai.lu 4 points 21 hours ago (1 child) The day my taxes go towards paying for people who don't have 2fa, we can discuss whether it should be mandatory. Also, comparing a compromised Netflix account to loss of life, really? permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 1 child comment replies: [–] baines@lemmy.cafe 1 point 21 hours ago comparing cost to society there is a reason ms forces updates now permalink fedilink source parent
[–] Miaou@jlai.lu 4 points 21 hours ago (1 child) The day my taxes go towards paying for people who don't have 2fa, we can discuss whether it should be mandatory. Also, comparing a compromised Netflix account to loss of life, really? permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 1 child comment replies: [–] baines@lemmy.cafe 1 point 21 hours ago comparing cost to society there is a reason ms forces updates now permalink fedilink source parent
[–] baines@lemmy.cafe 1 point 21 hours ago comparing cost to society there is a reason ms forces updates now permalink fedilink source parent
[–] rockerface@lemmy.cafe 2 points 21 hours ago Good thing you aren't in charge of anything, then. permalink fedilink source parent