[zorrophreak]

GAuth is nice, and I would say make it optional, although 2FA is something that should probably be user wide, maybe accessible at a certain post count or something. Because it kinda sucks to have to pay/upgrade with NSP just for 2FA

[sleaze]

GAuth is nice, and I would say make it optional, although 2FA is something that should probably be user wide, maybe accessible at a certain post count or something. Because it kinda sucks to have to pay/upgrade with NSP just for 2FA

why is everyone suggesting that you should have to jump through hoops for the site to offer you security?

[meow]

GAuth is nice, and I would say make it optional, although 2FA is something that should probably be user wide, maybe accessible at a certain post count or something. Because it kinda sucks to have to pay/upgrade with NSP just for 2FA

why is everyone suggesting that you should have to jump through hoops for the site to offer you security?

What this guy said.

To everyone who thinks there should be some requirement for having 2FA, there is literally no point in having a post count/upgrade for something that affects nobody on the forum except you. Furthermore, security should be a right, not a privilege.

[zorrophreak]

I'm not saying there should be a requirement, I honestly think 2FA should be available on signup and for all users. I'm saying if there has to be some requirement it should at least only be like a post count.

[mothered]

Definitely so.

As long as Two Factor Authentication (2FA) Is Implemented In It's correct form as follows:

2FA must contain two of the following three (authentication MUST derive from separate entities):

* Something you know (example, Password, PIN number, security question).
* Something you have (example, Cell phone, Smart card).
* Something you are (example, Biometrics- fingerprint, retinal scan).

Obviously the first two will apply here. Good suggestion Indeed.

[Aeolian]

You're right, that was a stupid suggestion on my part.

Either way we should get this implemented.

[4tune]

Sure, having an extra layer of security would be good to have. Having it would make Members feel a lot more safe.

Support. Good suggestion, OP.

[Wildfire]

Definitely so.

As long as Two Factor Authentication (2FA) Is Implemented In It's correct form as follows:

2FA must contain two of the following three (authentication MUST derive from separate entities):

* Something you know (example, Password, PIN number, security question).
* Something you have (example, Cell phone, Smart card).
* Something you are (example, Biometrics- fingerprint, retinal scan).

Obviously the first two will apply here. Good suggestion Indeed.

Wouldn't two passwords just defeat the purpose?

[mothered]

Wouldn't two passwords just defeat the purpose?

Having 2 entities of the "same" type, Is not classed as 2FA.

As you know, they must be 2 separate types of authentication (as mentioned above). As to whether two passwords will defeat the purpose, personally, I don't believe It will. Having two locks on your front door (with separate keys) to authorize access Is better than just the one. Having two passwords based on a password complexity requirement of completely different algorithms, Is better than having only the one.