Hacker News new | past | comments | ask | show | jobs | submit login

It really is every company's fault that jumps on this absurd trend of seeing SMS-2FA as the be-all and end-all of user identification and verification.

Google is actually doing much better than the competition here in many aspects (e.g. it is possible to operate a Google account completely without a phone number for 2FA or account recovery), but as far as I understand, one is still required to initially create an account.




> it is possible to operate a Google account completely without a phone number

This is only true for a limited time. I've tried to use a couple Google accounts this way and inevitably I log in from a new IP and Google's 2FA system kicks in - forcing me to either furnish a phone number or lose access to the account.

It's similar to how Twitter forces phone numbers out of people - just not as immediate.


Do they really ask for a phone number, or would a Yubikey work as well?


A yubikey would be as useless in this article's specific case, as the problem is losing valuable things (eg, phones). A yubikey is no different.

It too would be lost.


That's definitely a problem, and a tricky one to solve in the context of 2FA: One of these factors is usually knowledge (your password); the other then has to be possession or inherence, and the latter has problems as well.

Essentially, if you rule out possession, your choice is between server-side validated biometrics (if offered at all), or "double knowledge" (e.g. a password and email 2FA, with the email account also only protected by a password), which is pretty phishable.




Consider applying for YC's Summer 2025 batch! Applications are open till May 13

Guidelines | FAQ | Lists | API | Security | Legal | Apply to YC | Contact

Search: