4 ms·
It seems likely that enabling insecure account usage would be a net negative to huge swaths of their user base. Gmail is functionally the root of trust / skele
by x0x0 4y ago
It seems likely that enabling insecure account usage would be a net negative to huge swaths of their user base.
Gmail is functionally the root of trust / skeleton key to millions of people's online lives. The only real competitor is Facebook and, for some, Apple. I think Gmail is far better (more secure, more privacy respecting, less capricious) than Facebook.
With the admission by Chad that that homeless he advocates for can't retain mobile numbers, or ID cards, or 2fa keys, I have no idea how he thinks any secure access could possibly work.
- Kalium 4y agoI have the nagging sense that what we're seeing amounts to throwing one's hands in the air and exclaiming "There must be a way!" As others have pointed out, turning off 2FA is available. Apparently that doesn't work either because the people in question forget their passwords. So I guess we should add passwords and biometrics (not available on all hardware) to the list of things that aren't going to work. Like you, I'm left wondering what there is to anchor any level of security.