this post was submitted on 06 Sep 2023
408 points (80.4% liked)
Privacy
31975 readers
140 users here now
A place to discuss privacy and freedom in the digital world.
Privacy has become a very important issue in modern society, with companies and governments constantly abusing their power, more and more people are waking up to the importance of digital privacy.
In this community everyone is welcome to post links and discuss topics related to privacy.
Some Rules
- Posting a link to a website containing tracking isn't great, if contents of the website are behind a paywall maybe copy them into the post
- Don't promote proprietary software
- Try to keep things on topic
- If you have a question, please try searching for previous discussions, maybe it has already been answered
- Reposts are fine, but should have at least a couple of weeks in between so that the post can reach a new audience
- Be nice :)
Related communities
Chat rooms
much thanks to @gary_host_laptop for the logo design :)
founded 5 years ago
MODERATORS
Dumb take. All it's warning you is that without those, you won't have a way to recover your account it you lose your password or if it's hacked and someone changes it.
Yeah, I'm all for bashing companies regarding privacy and whatnot, but this is just informing/warning you about account security.
It's facetious though. They don't need phone numbers to verify you, they can just use TOTP codes which can be used by anybody. Ask yourself why they insist on you giving them your phone to enable TOTP, when there's no relation between the two. They want phone numbers because lots of people stick with one number all their life so it's an excellent means of identifying them.
I'm not familiar enough with TOTP codes, but they don't seem feasible for your average user as a reliable way to recover your account
My school is requiring students to instal specifically Microsoft 2fa (uses microsoft's proprietary algorithm). So I'm sure that people can figure how to download an app and scan a qr code.
If this is for a M365 account you don't have to use the Microsoft authenticator. It'll nag every login but it'll let you use a different authenticator. I set up my college email last year with Duo as the 2FA because I already needed Duo for work, and it was fine
I attempted to use Aegis and there was an error popping up that said Microsoft's 2fa is proprietary and isn't supported.
What you do is when you're setting up the 2FA token in M365 select the type of 2FA since it supports a wide variety of 2FA types, including SMS
It was only the proprietary 2fa and sms. I'd rather do the totp.
Huh I had not realized that. Like I said, I used Duo just because I already needed it for work
I mean, if you come back years later and lay a claim to an account you're going to have to show something that proves who you are.
An SMS sent to the phone number stored on the account is no more reliable than asking the user to generate a code with an authenticator app (based on a secret that is stored in both the account and the app). People can lose the app/phone just as easily as the number. Also, SMS confirmations suffer from many vulnerabilities that TOTP codes do not.
The main point is that these methods are not related. Google could and should offer them side by side. Let people take their pick of any of the following:
Google is witholding some of these methods until you give them your main phone number, which is obviously a ploy to get your main number so they can track you.
I'm frankly surprised that a privacy-oriented community is not aware of the fact phone numbers are an excellent means of tracking people across services and databases for extended periods of time.
Google kinda does do that though. You can have a recovery email (or multiple IIRC), or you can have a phone number.
TOTP and hardware authenticators are more for second factor authentication; you're probably more likely to use those than a password, and they don't really make sense for recovery.
Why wouldn't they make sense for recovery? They're authentication factors just like passwords.
"Second" factor means you should have multiple, not that one of them is beneath the others. And they all work just as well for authentication and recovery.
Because you're much more likely to lose or break a hardware fob than lose a password, let alone change (lose or whatever) recovery email or phone.
Like, it would be a neat option; ideally you could set up literally anything and say what combination of factors you want to use for recovery and which to use for authentication, but it'd be a pretty big change for a tiny minority of users.
Google can use the phone number on file to text a verification code for password reset.
People here don't realize how dumb the average user can be. I've helped countless people attempt to recover their accounts to which they forgot the password to because they were logged in on their computer and just went to it, and were shocked once they let the cookie expire.
Backup security questions? "Oh, I put random garbage there, there's no way I remember".
I've known people that end up with a new email more often than they end up with a new phone number for that exact reason. Or worse, they also got a new phone number without thinking about their 2FA SMS and lose a whole bunch of accounts.
With social engineering attacks all over the place, more and more companies just won't help you in the name of security.
Those users absolutely need to be nudged towards adding backup account recovery info.
Yeah, probably, but I've noticed lots of sites use security as an excuse to get your phone number. For my work account Google forced me to enable 2FA for security reasons, but wouldn't allow the authenticator, only my phone number, until they had it. Then I was allowed to switch to the authenticator. That was not a setting my employer could change, either, they tried for half an hour.
Phone numbers are used to congregate the your data that's collected on different sites to one profile. I'm pretty sure that is the main reason Google and others are pushing you so hard to give it up.
Nonsense. You don't even have to use Google's authenticator when setting up MFA. You can just scan the QR it gives you using any authenticator app. You can use Microsoft Authenticator, Duo Mobile, Lastpass, WatchGaurd, etc, etc
I don't think you understand. They don't force you to use Google Authenticator. They don't let you use any authenticator app until you give them your phone number.
This tactic was used in the past by many other sites, off the top of my head LinkedIn, Facebook, Amazon. It's a scheme to get your number because then it can be used to cross-identify you everywhere.
Example: if I were to verify my phone number with Twitch, which is an Amazon company, they would be able to correlate everything I ever bought on Amazon with my gaming habits.
Phone numbers are an attack vector. Especially for 2FA.
There are other ways to recover an account. Google just wants to have your phone number, security is an excuse and use of fear mongering to get is pathetic and shameless.
Can you describe some alternatives to a recovery phone or email? Honest question.
Secondary e-mail address, security questions, recovery key, physical key fob - from the top of my head. Better or worse, the point is - it doesn't have to be a phone number.
It's asking for a secondary email address or phone number. Security questions are insecure and probably the worst reset methode there is. Most users don't even know what a security key is so it's pretty pointless to mention it if only like 1% are actually using it and it could cause more confusion than it helps.
Edit: apparently it actually does ask for both. But it's not even mandatory. Its just a warning
I'm curious about their perspectives too.
The only other options I can consider are government-issued ID verification, a bank validation process (a fast transfer to confirm identity), or the use of a debit/credit card.
All of the above alternatives involve significantly more intrusion than requesting a phone number.
Agreed, or a burner alternate email. If Google didn't give any option other than phone number maybe we could make a case of ill intent.
I think the main driver here isn't that they want your phone (although they're happy to have it, I'm sure), but they don't want the tech support headache of manually verifying and unlocking accounts for tons of people.
Especially when they already have access to your entire email history. If they wanted your phone number for nefarious means it will probably be somewhere in that history already. Your email already requires complete trust in the email provider service, there's so much more sensitive stuff they already have access to.
Having your phone number means that whenever you get a new Android phone they will instantly know who you are even if you don't use the same Google account on that phone, or even if you never use any Google account. How does that sound?
There's also this thing called a phone book which has almost everyone and their number in it. Phone numbers are not sensitive information, period.
Phone books don't show mobile numbers. In Europe at least mobile registries are private and subject to restrictions. Phone numbers are considered personal identification information under privacy laws, because portability regulations have made it possible for people to carry the same number for most of their lives.
Heck, I'm not sure phone books are still a thing over here, but if they still exist they're not allowed to show numbers for private individuals.
A few years ago there were websites that maintained phone number databases and would let you search who owns a number but GDPR stopped them cold.
Well the alternative to having to recover your account is to prevent you losing access to it which usually comes in the form of 2FA or MFA.
If you're so protective of your personal information that you don't want to hand over your phone number then you should be taking steps to secure your account.
Or don't use Gmail.
But most users don't have OTP or FIDO.
Wait until they hear about this thing called a phone book.
[This comment has been deleted by an automated system]
Actually I had to let go of an email because Google wouldn’t let me login without giving my number or alternative email