[HN Gopher] Playing with more user-friendly methods for multi-fa...
       ___________________________________________________________________
        
       Playing with more user-friendly methods for multi-factor
       authentication
        
       Author : noleary
       Score  : 40 points
       Date   : 2025-07-28 22:04 UTC (1 days ago)
        
 (HTM) web link (tesseral.com)
 (TXT) w3m dump (tesseral.com)
        
       | averageRoyalty wrote:
       | Quite funny. Amusingly, the self-portrait method is effectively
       | the signatures we considered acceptable for financial and legal
       | transactions for many decades - make up a scribble and compare it
       | to a scribble you do previously - if it's close enough and you
       | _seem_ to be the guy, we're good.
        
         | sunrunner wrote:
         | > make up a scribble and compare it to a scribble you do
         | previously
         | 
         | I'll take "Lies that your parents told you about how the world
         | works" for 500, Alex.
         | 
         | Serious question though, I thought the whole signature thing
         | was more of a legally binding thing for the signer asserting
         | themselves as X, sort of like checking the "I'm over 18" box.
         | Sort of a "Well we asked you the question, it's not our fault
         | if you lied" type thing.
        
           | j-bos wrote:
           | I remember opening a bank account and having to sign a
           | specific card that the bank would keep solely to verify my
           | signature on checks.
        
           | progbits wrote:
           | I always do a random scribble. If I want to later deny
           | signing something good luck proving its me, won't match any
           | of my other signatures. At least that's the theory, this is
           | mostly a joke to me and I don't care if it works.
        
           | boogieknite wrote:
           | "lies that your American parents told you about how the world
           | works"
           | 
           | i went to Germany as an exchange student, scribbled out my
           | random scribble for my travellers check, and they denied me
           | because my signature wasn't close enough to their record.
           | heard a similar story from a friend who visited Japan
        
           | evantbyrne wrote:
           | Signatures are the tip of the iceberg. Plenty of other forms
           | of bs forensics live on in the legal system in some shape or
           | form. e.g., fingerprint analysis, polygraphs, field sobriety
           | tests, devices that literally do nothing, trainings on
           | reading facial expressions, and so on. If you can take a two
           | week course on it, then chances are there is some cop
           | somewhere using it to detain people.
        
       | FuriouslyAdrift wrote:
       | A fingerprint locked NFC Yubikey seems to be the preferred with
       | all ages at work. Everyone likes it as long as it is once per
       | login to the computer (which basically means we have to use Edge
       | for everything which is fine).
       | 
       | Everyone universally hates passkeys because they never work
       | right.
        
       | 1970-01-01 wrote:
       | These are such terrible ideas that I expect someone already has
       | one of them on github.
        
       | seplox wrote:
       | > When I tell people I work on authentication software, I nearly
       | always hear some version of the same story: I hate multifactor
       | authentication. No, really. People hate this stuff.
       | 
       | I hate all of the half-cooked non-TOTP MFA methods that I'm
       | forced to use. Just let me use my freaking authenticator app. If
       | you believe that your users prefer (or maybe it's just you?) more
       | databroker-friendly methods, then fine, but please at least
       | provide TOTP as an option.
        
         | cosmic_cheese wrote:
         | I wish that banks would offer TOTP. SMS is famously insecure
         | and poorly suited for something that's a load-bearing pillar in
         | most of our lives, and TOTP is probably the most reasonable
         | replacement. Unfortunately only a tiny handful of US banks
         | offer non-SMS 2FA of any kind, and to my knowledge the one that
         | does (Scwhab I think?) requires the use of a hardware gadget
         | even though it's standard TOTP (which people have written
         | python scripts to extract the necessary bits of info from).
        
           | toomuchtodo wrote:
           | Fidelity offers TOTP standard support, works with the native
           | Apple Password app/keychain.
        
           | hinkley wrote:
           | To this day I'm just amazed that World of Warcraft tried to
           | mandate security tokens in a time when E*Trade barely
           | supported them.
           | 
           | Why is a video game embarrassing fintech?
        
             | abdullahkhalids wrote:
             | World of Warcraft was supporting tens of thousands poor
             | teenagers in developing countries, who would farm high
             | value items in the game and then sell the account /items to
             | rich people who didn't want to put in the hard work.
             | 
             | There was (maybe still is) lots of money to be made by
             | hacking accounts and selling them.
             | 
             | WoW was fintech!
        
         | riedel wrote:
         | At least in Germany all the SMS 2FA has been shut off, but
         | replaced with tons of custom 2FA apps. The security argument is
         | certainly that they can check for 'insecure' devices. But I
         | wonder what the empirical evidence here is and how often
         | (compared to phishing/social engineering) a TOTP token was
         | actually stolen. Worst thing is IMHO Microsoft now which seem
         | to have also shut off the TOTP option and use some other
         | propriatary 2FA scheme now. IMHO banks should simply use FIDO2
         | HW tokens, but with all that passkey bullshit it becomes
         | unlikely...
        
       | thcipriani wrote:
       | Poker hands would pretty cool for encoding things that you have
       | to recognize quickly; e.g., key fingerprints. If there are 2.5M
       | unique hands then encoding 256 bits of information requires
       | 12(ish) poker hands.
        
       | smokel wrote:
       | One aspect I find puzzling is why most two-factor authentication
       | (2FA) applications restrict authentication to only a single valid
       | code at any given time. This constraint inevitably creates a
       | window during which it is inconvenient or impractical to copy the
       | code to another device. Allowing the previous code to remain
       | briefly valid would eliminate this unnecessary delay, enhancing
       | usability without significantly compromising security.
        
         | brewdad wrote:
         | Ente Auth displays the current code and the next code so you
         | can choose whichever best meets the time remaining until the
         | changeover. It's a nice usability feature.
        
         | fredley wrote:
         | FWIW 2FAS starts to show you the next code near the end of the
         | window, this is very handy https://2fas.com/
        
         | conradludgate wrote:
         | Have you actually tried writing a code close to the expiry
         | window? I've definitely submitted codes a few seconds after the
         | expiry and had them still be accepted
        
         | _Algernon_ wrote:
         | Since totp codes are time based and there is no guarantee that
         | time of the generating device, and the verifying device are
         | exactly identical they usually allow some room for error.
         | You'll probably be fine entering the code before or after for
         | example.
        
         | zie wrote:
         | See RFC-6238: https://www.rfc-editor.org/rfc/rfc6238
         | 
         | This is all in the standard, most places have implemented one
         | of the options. I've implemented all of the options at least
         | once. It's configurable based on how lax/secure you want to be.
         | 
         | Most places I've dealt with allow the previous and next code to
         | also be used, so instead of a 30s window you actually have a
         | 1.5m window.
        
         | JamesSwift wrote:
         | I believe every single 2fa system I've used accepts either the
         | current code or the one directly prior.
        
       | anteloper wrote:
       | Why do we like entropy in auth factors?
        
         | noleary wrote:
         | Imagine two different password strength standards:
         | 
         | 1. Just a 4 digit numeric PIN like `1981`
         | 
         | 2. A 20 character upper/lower/numeric/special-character
         | password like `qmd1tkf7mwa.PQB0qrz$`
         | 
         | --
         | 
         | The PIN has lower entropy and is therefore a lot easier to
         | brute force.
         | 
         | I haven't calculated this stuff myself -- I just used Wolfram
         | Alpha -- but it looks like the PIN would take <1 second to
         | brute force, while the 20 character password would take 7.6 *
         | 10^25 years. [1] [2]
         | 
         | --
         | 
         | [1]
         | https://www.wolframalpha.com/input?i=password+strength+qmd1t...
         | 
         | [2] https://www.wolframalpha.com/input?i=password+strength+1981
        
       | Liftyee wrote:
       | Pedantry warning: I'm not convinced that some of these methods
       | qualify as a second factor of authentication, based on the
       | "something you know, something you have, something you are"
       | model. They're both "something you know", right?
        
       ___________________________________________________________________
       (page generated 2025-07-29 23:01 UTC)