Your problem is not with SMS as a second factor though. (Unless you think the attacker had your password as well). It is with the use of SMS as a single recovery factor. The very things that make SMS a uniquely good second factor make it an awful only factor. Use of SMS for account recovery should in general (or at least for important accounts) have a delay (order of days) that allows the real user to intervene.
If the argument is "but you still have a password" it really kind of shows how weak SMS 2FA is. Compare that to a U2F token where you can very reasonably remove the password entirely and still be just as safe - it is itself just a strong auth mechanism, whereas SMS is adding extremely questionable value between the ability to phish SMS 2FAs or hijack the number. Even in a situation where the attacker would have neede…
Tell HN: SMS-based two-factor authentication is not secure
101–110 of 291 posts
Re: Tell HN: SMS-based two-factor authentication is not secure
#102SMS 2FA is not for you.
They say it's for you (for your security or your protection or your ease of use or whatever) but that is a lie.
In cases where SMS 2FA is forced, to the exclusion of all other proofing mechanisms, it is generally because the provider has a brutally difficult spam/scam problem that is complicated to solve.
So, instead of solving their spam/scam problem, they just throw some sand in the gears (of their users) and very loosely attempt to piggyback on the physical phone / physical SIM / physical ID confluence that constitutes a "normal user".
This is, of course, a very leaky mapping and anyone determined can, of course, work right around this. But it does seem to lessen their (again, brutally difficult) spam/scam problem.
The most ironic deployment of this (desperate) technique is Twilio whose own numbers cannot be used for SMS 2FA auth[1] and yet they require a true, mobile (non-VOIP) number to use their own service.
[1] Twilio numbers are not mobile numbers. Most SMS 2FA is sent from "short codes" and short codes cannot SMS non-mobile ("voip") numbers.
Re: Tell HN: SMS-based two-factor authentication is not secure
#103The amount of 'splaining going on in this discussion helps illustrate the trouble. If SMS2FA were actually fit for purpose it would not require so many internet defenders.
[0] https://blog.cmpxchg8b.com/2020/07/you-dont-need-sms-2fa.htm...
Re: Tell HN: SMS-based two-factor authentication is not secure
#104Re: Tell HN: SMS-based two-factor authentication is not secure
#105Your problem is not with SMS as a second factor though. (Unless you think the attacker had your password as well). It is with the use of SMS as a single recovery factor. The very things that make SMS a uniquely good second factor make it an awful only factor. Use of SMS for account recovery should in general (or at least for important accounts) have a delay (order of days) that allows the real user to intervene.
Re: Tell HN: SMS-based two-factor authentication is not secure
#106It is a mistake to ask consumers to protect, backup, and secure their digital lives themselves. Consumers don't have the time or skills to keep up with the hackers. If Apple, Google, ATT, Verizon etc. cannot provide digital security, this is an opportunity for someone else to step in. My personal suggestion is this is a ripe opportunity for someone like the US Post Office or Department of Motor Vehicles. Consumers would go to the US Post Office or DMV and purchase a Yubi key from them. The additional value they add, is they can verify the identity of the consumers who is purchasing the Yubi key and replace the key if it is lost/stolen. Similar to how they process driver licenses or passports. This service is optional and would actually cost money. I would gladly pay a monthly fee for this peace of mind.
Re: Tell HN: SMS-based two-factor authentication is not secure
#107It was a bit complex, but I eventually got Keepass to generate the TOTP codes which so far are pretty awesome.
Re: Tell HN: SMS-based two-factor authentication is not secure
#108Earlier quoted context omitted.
TOTP is phishable, which is a way way way more common attack than sim swaps.
phishable how? "your account has been hacked, please provide us a TOTP code"?
2. It pops up a username/password screen. The user types in their credentials for realbank.com.
3a. The owners of fakebank.com use your creds to log in to realbank.com and are presented with a TOTP page.
3b. fakebank.com loads another page that asks the user for their TOTP. The user enters it, still thinking they are logging in to realbank.com
4. The owners of fakebank.com use the TOTP to authenticate as the user with realbank.com.
Entire SDKs to automate this are sold on the black market.
Re: Tell HN: SMS-based two-factor authentication is not secure
#109Earlier quoted context omitted.
Why cancel your old phone number in that country when you still have a bank account there? I suggest a bank which doesn't suck, such as bunq.
if you immigrate, like I did, but still have some pension funds or saving accounts in your home country. Why would I want a local phone line?
Re: Tell HN: SMS-based two-factor authentication is not secure
#110That isn't 2FA. That is a single factor recovery process. SIM-swapping only defeats SMS-based 2FA if the attacker also has your password, which is difficult to accomplish if you are using good passwords that are unique.