Live data from Hacker News

Let's Ban SMS 2FA

lorendb.dev

41–46 of 46 posts

Re: Let's Ban SMS 2FA

#41

The author seems to assume that security is (or should be) the only consideration in implementing 2FA. When in practice, practicality and convenience are part of the equation as well. While imperfect, SMS 2FA significantly improves security while also remaining convenient. Instead of suggesting that we put in place legislation banning it (?!), perhaps the author should come up with an alternative solution that provid…

A lot of people have been working on coming up with such an improved system for a long time now, but haven't succeeded yet. This appears to be an incredibly hard problem.

Re: Let's Ban SMS 2FA

#42
since it is unencrypted and SMS messages are publicly broadcast wirelessly. This means that bad actors who are physically near to you can trivially snoop on 2FA codes that are texted to you.

This is news to me. I worked in the wireless industry and our phones were encrypted and this was in the 90's, albeit GSM encryption which is weak by todays standard and also routing over SS7 which is not encrypted but that is a different set of problems. Are we saying that we have gone backwards and phones are no longer encrypted or is this specific to people using LTE-over-wifi and the people at risk are in a coffee shop? That sounds like a LTE-over-wifi problem that needs to be addressed if so. A mitigating control could be a trivial update to cell phone's to prefer LTE over wifi for text messaging or to disable texting over wifi until the protocols have been fixed to properly accommodate shared wifi. LTE over wifi uses a VPN so I am not sure what is going on here. If this is a real issue then lets address that issue. Either way I do not use shared Wifi. I have more of an issue of text messages being routed through Google by default which is extremely problematic in that it brings both SS7 weaknesses and advertising company vulnerabilities.

Perhaps I am the odd one out here and my reply won't apply to anyone else on HN. I know I am not alone however as many in my community share my beliefs and methodologies. I do not use passkeys and will not as my devices are ephemeral. If anything my dependency on cell phones and data-persisting devices will be diminished sooner than later. I tried out smart phones and I hate them. I am going back to a dumb flip phone. Hardware tokens are also problematic as most companies do not want to spend the money on either the hardware or the support costs to maintain them. For desktops I iPXE or sometimes USB boot a default image and then copy down a few config files. Honestly I just don't log into things over my phone and will not. Nothing is that important and almost everyone I do business with I can either walk into their brick-and-mortor business or I can use a desktop PC with a secure password manager at my leisure. I honestly prefer to walk into a business so that all the employees know me and will know if someone is up to no good. All but one bank account is read-only from the internet and I keep very little in that one account and outgoing ACH transfers are blocked.

Re: Let's Ban SMS 2FA

#43

I like Fastmail’s position on SMS 2FA: https://www.fastmail.help/hc/en-us/articles/360058752374-Usi... In short: offer SMS 2FA, and indeed push users reasonably firmly¹ into adding SMS recovery at the least because for almost all users that’s the right balance of convenience and security, but certainly don’t limit it to SMS, offering better methods like U2F and TOTP. (Disclosure: I was employed by Fastmail for a few…

[deleted]

Re: Let's Ban SMS 2FA

#44

So the case against SMS 2FA boils down to “There are two factors, but the second factor is something a determined actor can get around by SIM swapping.” But there are still two factors and SMS 2FA handles disaster recovery much better than the listed alternatives for most people. This argument strikes me as kind of like - “a determined actor can get around a deadbolt pretty easily, so the standard for homes should be…

> But there are still two factors

usually not. The problem with SMS 2fa is that once a company can do it is almost always easy to social engineer them into resetting the password based on only being able to pass the SMS 2fa... which is a big problem because SMS 2fa has no security against a moderately committed attacker.

The only way you can protect yourself is to refuse to give online services a phone number.

Re: Let's Ban SMS 2FA

#45
post #36
post #5

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Author here - yes, I agree that SMS 2FA is much better than nothing, but let's be honest, implementing and using actually secure 2FA is a lot easier than installing a vault door on your home. When the barrier to adoption and inconvenience to the user is so low, there's no reason to not adopt better 2FA methods.

> much better than nothing If you wouldn't advocate banning deadbolt locks just because vault doors are better, why advocate banning SMS 2FA?

One reason to ban 2FA SMS is because end users take on most of the cost of a compromise, but they are generally pretty poweless to prevent others from creating the vulnerability, particularly where the party requiring the SMS 2fa is a government or government contractor.

I don't know that I'd go so far as saying that a ban is the right thing, but something is needed.

Re: Let's Ban SMS 2FA

#46
post #18

I like Fastmail’s position on SMS 2FA: https://www.fastmail.help/hc/en-us/articles/360058752374-Usi... In short: offer SMS 2FA, and indeed push users reasonably firmly¹ into adding SMS recovery at the least because for almost all users that’s the right balance of convenience and security, but certainly don’t limit it to SMS, offering better methods like U2F and TOTP. (Disclosure: I was employed by Fastmail for a few…

100% Banning SMS 2FA is the wrong approach, because it is better than no 2FA and every cell phone supports it, out of the box. What should be mandated is (a) giving users choice of a non-SMS 2FA method (probably just pick one for a standard, e.g. TOTP) & (b) allowing users to explicitly disable SMS 2FA on their account. As a least common denominator, SMS is fair. But there should be an option to do better, securely,…

> because it is better than no 2FA

I dispute that position. Almost universally "SMS 2FA" can be used as single factor "recovery" and it is unambiguously less secure than a single simple well selected password.

Post reply on HN