Can I refuse MS Authenticator?
Can I refuse MS Authenticator?
So my company decided to migrate office suite and email etc to Microsoft365. Whatever. But for 2FA login they decided to disable the option to choose "any authenticator" and force Microsoft Authenticator on the (private) phones of both employees and volunteers. Is there any valid reason why they would do this, like it's demonstrably safer? Or is this a battle I can pick to shield myself a little from MS?
You're viewing a single thread.
We let anyone use any authentication app. The Microsoft one is the best one. I'm pushing to make us exclusive because I'm sick of the IT support guys trying to support a dozen apps. You don't have to use your Microsoft account provided to use the app or back up your credentials.
I’m pushing to make us exclusive because I’m sick of the IT support guys trying to support a dozen apps.
While I understand this... Why not just refuse to support and NOT remove the capability for all those who don't need support and work just fine with their own? It's not like TOTP isn't a solved problem at this point.
Eg. "we only support MS auth, If you choose to use your own you will not receive any company support."
Because that shit only works in fantasy land. If you can use it, employees WILL expect support and will repeatedly raise hell if they don't get it. Is a losing battle.
The option to use TOTP is already well hidden. It's not like someone who does not know what he is looking for and uses an Authenticator already will accidentally select it.
Because that shit only works in fantasy land.
Glad to know my company, and the companies I contract for are fantasy land then.
employees WILL expect support
And they will get it if they use the company default options.
Nothing about this is losing. I'm CIO for 3 separate companies (2 by contract). None of them have issues with this type of policy. We do bare minimum to not limit the toolset they can use and support a specific set of tools that we like the best. That's it. Those who are smart enough to use their own tools clearly know enough about IT to make good decisions that we can trust. The rest use the default tools... and we support those tools explicitly.
More importantly, we're not shitting on those who ARE making good decisions overall, but just have a preference. That makes the employees feel heard and keeps them happy. Keeping them happier keeps everyone more productive.
As a security enthusiast, please also push for allowing physical security keys. They are awesome.
As a cryptography nerd, +100000 to that
Upvote for providing an explanation, though I personally favour employee freedom.
Is Microsoft Authenticator available on Linux?
It's on Android, but
I meant more generally
Ms auth is a mobile only application. Not even available on windows or macOS. The point of it is to provide a second factor of authentication in the for of "something you have". There are a few factors that can be used for authentication. Something you know (password), something you have (hardware like a key or a phone), and something you are (iris scan, DNA, fingerprint, other biometric). Ms auth uses something you have and something you are to authenticate most users. You provide a password and then you prove you have your cellphone and your cellphone checks your biometrics to see if you are you. In that way, it is effectively checking all 3 factors.
Why couldn't "laptop" be a second factor?
It is using windows hello on compatible machines and through persistent tokens on Mac and Windows machines not compatible with hello. You have to create that token with a known factor such as a mobile device but outside of that, users almost never have to sign in with persistent tokens.