3 ms·
This is one reason why I have a Google Voice number. If my underlying. number is "lost" I can just reconfigure GV. But there is some (increasingly rare) 2FA tha
by Zigurd 4y ago
This is one reason why I have a Google Voice number. If my underlying. number is "lost" I can just reconfigure GV. But there is some (increasingly rare) 2FA that does not work with numbers other than telco numbers. When you sign up an SMS vendor for 2FA, make sure it works with VoIP services.
- rdbell 4y agoThis is even worse. You’re boned when Google bans your account and refuses to tell you why.
- 0xbadcafebee 4y agoYou can still port your number away from Google even if they ban you.
- arjvik 4y agoHow? Don't you have to unlock your number first somehow?
- creeble 4y agoYou mean increasingly common? I have found that my GV number has become useless for most TOTP services, and for a lot of services that want a number to send a text.
- Zigurd 4y agoBoth based on my experiences and having worked on mobile infrastructure (though not messaging), I am puzzled why this would trend in the wrong direction. Messaging is all IP since LTE. I can imagine poor integration/operations in parts of networks still using an SMSC and IP/SM gateway. But why would there be a general trend against interoperation?
- creeble 4y agoI think because 100% of Google Voice numbers are forwarding numbers, and 2fa folks feel like that is a risk factor. I really don’t know, but I do know it’s trending that way for GV, specifically.
- jandrese 4y ago> But there is some (increasingly rare) 2FA that does not work with numbers other than telco numbers. My experience is that this is not "increasingly rare" but "almost universal" at this point. VoIP numbers are useless for SMS account verification. People who thought they could bypass phone company price gouging found themselves out in the cold when signing up for email accounts, social media accounts, or even their own bank.