4 ms·

It's disturbing how many developers simply gloss over the fact that requiring a smartphone with one of two non-free OSes installed (Android and IOS) is severely

It's disturbing how many developers simply gloss over the fact that requiring a smartphone with one of two non-free OSes installed (Android and IOS) is severely limiting the user's freedom in their use of digital services. In the Netherlands the ING bank was testing the waters this year by holding back on announcing a non-smartphone alternative to their ageing authentication methods (either SMS or a list of pre-generated codes received by mail). All of their communication was bent on nudging customers to use their banking smartphone app, and only at the end of this year did they announce a separate hardware solution for customers who don't want to, or cannot, use a smartphone for their banking. Every other bank in the Netherlands already had such hardware devices (TOTP usually, although newer generations use more complex methods) for a decade. U2F and its successors are the way forward if we want to maintain some semblance of digital freedom, not tying your whole identity to a smartphone.

em-bee 8y ago
could you give some exapmples on how it limits the use of your device? while i agree with you, i seem to lack the imagination to come up with realistic examples that i can present as arguments. i am afraid anything i think of would get a response like "yeah, sure, but noone uses their phone like that" or they'll simply accuse me of being paranoid.
- xte 8y ago
  I do not want proprietary software nor I want to depend on black boxes to use a service. So if a bank, a public administration etc demand using proprietary stuff that does not came from them they force their customers to buy such black boxes and suffer all their limitations. For instance I hate in the same way countries that ask users to install proprietary crappy software's to pay taxes instead simple pdfs/standard WebUI.
- Freak_NL 8y ago
  > could you give some exapmples on how it limits the use of your device? Forcing me to use a smartphone app means I can't use a normal desktop or laptop computer, or even a non-Android, non-IOS smartphone. It means that institutions that provide a semi-public utility (e.g., banks) force people to support and agree with the terms of use supplied by a (foreign) megacorporation to function as a citizen in the digital realm. That is inherently undemocratic and a threat to our freedoms. Expecting the vast majority of citizens to have access to a computing device with a modern web browser is somewhat reasonable (as long as those who can't are supported by other means). You can at least choose what software you run, and there are free software options available. With smartphone apps (well-built web applications excluded) that freedom does not exist.

em-bee 8y ago

could you give some exapmples on how it limits the use of your device? while i agree with you, i seem to lack the imagination to come up with realistic examples that i can present as arguments. i am afraid anything i think of would get a response like "yeah, sure, but noone uses their phone like that" or they'll simply accuse me of being paranoid.

xte 8y ago
I do not want proprietary software nor I want to depend on black boxes to use a service. So if a bank, a public administration etc demand using proprietary stuff that does not came from them they force their customers to buy such black boxes and suffer all their limitations. For instance I hate in the same way countries that ask users to install proprietary crappy software's to pay taxes instead simple pdfs/standard WebUI.
Freak_NL 8y ago
> could you give some exapmples on how it limits the use of your device? Forcing me to use a smartphone app means I can't use a normal desktop or laptop computer, or even a non-Android, non-IOS smartphone. It means that institutions that provide a semi-public utility (e.g., banks) force people to support and agree with the terms of use supplied by a (foreign) megacorporation to function as a citizen in the digital realm. That is inherently undemocratic and a threat to our freedoms. Expecting the vast majority of citizens to have access to a computing device with a modern web browser is somewhat reasonable (as long as those who can't are supported by other means). You can at least choose what software you run, and there are free software options available. With smartphone apps (well-built web applications excluded) that freedom does not exist.