My staff email is boring. You're more than welcome to break in.

-Chad
On Aug 7, 2014 7:27 PM, "Pine W" <[email protected]> wrote:

> There are "good" reasons people would target checkuser accounts, WMF staff
> email accounts, and other accounts that have access to lots of private info
> like functionary email accounts and accounts with access to restricted IRC
> channels.
>
> Pine
>
>
> On Thu, Aug 7, 2014 at 11:21 AM, Ryan Lane <[email protected]> wrote:
>
> > On Thu, Aug 7, 2014 at 6:58 AM, Casey Brown <[email protected]>
> wrote:
> >
> > > On Thu, Aug 7, 2014 at 8:10 AM, Risker <[email protected]> wrote:
> > > > A lot of the "solutions"  normally bandied about involve things like
> > > > two-factor identification, which has the "additional" password coming
> > > > through a separate route (e.g., gmail two-factor ID sends a second
> > > password
> > > > as a text to a mobile) and means having more expensive technology) or
> > > using
> > > > technology like dongles that cannot be sent to users in certain
> > > countries.
> > >
> > > Actually, most modern internet implementations use the TOTP algorithm
> > > open standard that anyone can use for free.
> > > <https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Time-based_One-time_Password_Algorithm>
> > > One of the most common methods, other than through text messages, is
> > > the Google Authenticator App that anyone can download for free on a
> > > smart phone. <https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Google_Authenticator>.
> > >
> > >
> > Yep. This. It's already being used for high-risk accounts on
> > wikitech.wikimedia.org. It's not in good enough shape to be used
> anywhere
> > else, since if you lose your device you'd lose your account. Supporting
> two
> > factor auth also requires supporting multiple ways to rescue your account
> > if you lose your device (and don't write down your scratch tokens, which
> is
> > common). Getting this flow to work in a way that actually adds any
> security
> > benefit is difficult. See the amount of effort Google has gone through
> for
> > this.
> >
> > Let's be a little real here, though. There's honestly no good reason to
> > target these accounts. There's basically no major damage they can do and
> > there's very little private information accessible to them, so attackers
> > don't really care enough to attack them.
> >
> > We should take basic account security seriously, but we shouldn't go
> > overboard.
> >
> > - Ryan
> > _______________________________________________
> > Wikitech-l mailing list
> > [email protected]
> > https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikitech-l
> >
> _______________________________________________
> Wikitech-l mailing list
> [email protected]
> https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikitech-l
_______________________________________________
Wikitech-l mailing list
[email protected]
https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikitech-l

Reply via email to