Asklemmy

44152 readers

1897 users here now

A loosely moderated place to ask open-ended questions

Search asklemmy 🔍

If your post meets the following criteria, it's welcome here!

Open-ended question
Not offensive: at this point, we do not have the bandwidth to moderate overtly political discussions. Assume best intent and be excellent to each other.
Not regarding using or support for Lemmy: context, see the list of support communities and tools for finding communities below
Not ad nauseam inducing: please make sure it is a question that would be new to most members
An actual topic of discussion

Looking for support?

Looking for a community?

Lemmyverse: community search
sub.rehab: maps old subreddits to fediverse options, marks official as such
!lemmy411@lemmy.ca: a community for finding communities

~Icon~ ~by~ ~@Double_A@discuss.tchncs.de~

founded 5 years ago

MODERATORS

210

Can I refuse MS Authenticator? (lemmy.ml)

submitted 6 months ago by Martin@lemmy.ml to c/asklemmy@lemmy.ml

262 comments fedilink hide all child comments

So my company decided to migrate office suite and email etc to Microsoft365. Whatever. But for 2FA login they decided to disable the option to choose "any authenticator" and force Microsoft Authenticator on the (private) phones of both employees and volunteers. Is there any valid reason why they would do this, like it's demonstrably safer? Or is this a battle I can pick to shield myself a little from MS?

you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments

[–] deweydecibel@lemmy.world 0 points 6 months ago (1 children)

No, you can actually block them from adding additional devices. Once they add a TOTP device, they can not add or change to another without admin approval.

But more to the point, if the admin requires the management of the authentication software, I.e. Bitwarden or authy or whatever, then they clearly have concerns about the security of the MFA on the user's device. If text messages are no longer considered secure then we move to the TOTP apps, but now if we're just summarily deciding the apps are no longer considered secure, we're demanding a secure app controlled by the admin must be used for MFA.

Can we not see where this is going next? Are we really under the delusion that because we have this magical Microsoft Authentication app now, MFA need never become more secure? This is the end of the road, nothing else will be asked of the user ever again?

If the concern is for the security of MFA on the user's side of that equation, then trying to manage that security on a device that company does not own is a waste of time. Eventually this is not going to be enough.

So let's just skip this step entirely and move on to fully controlled company devices used for MFA.

[–] IHawkMike@lemmy.world 1 points 6 months ago

Look man, it's okay to be wrong. It's a natural part of growth.

But when you double down on your ignorance instead of taking the opportunity to open your mind and listen to the experts in the room, you just end up embarrassing yourself.

Try to be better.