From 05d0a78be66567eb29a2249eb71cb472e09c060472a980c8b1dbf614332f98ba Mon Sep 17 00:00:00 2001 From: Nicholas Johnson Date: Thu, 4 Aug 2022 00:00:00 +0000 Subject: New entry: comparing-multi-factor-authentication-methods --- ...omparing-multi-factor-authentication-methods.md | 35 ++++++++++++++++++++++ 1 file changed, 35 insertions(+) create mode 100644 content/entry/comparing-multi-factor-authentication-methods.md (limited to 'content/entry') diff --git a/content/entry/comparing-multi-factor-authentication-methods.md b/content/entry/comparing-multi-factor-authentication-methods.md new file mode 100644 index 0000000..7d28c4d --- /dev/null +++ b/content/entry/comparing-multi-factor-authentication-methods.md @@ -0,0 +1,35 @@ +--- +title: "Comparing Multi-Factor Authentication Methods" +date: 2022-08-05T00:00:00 +draft: false +--- +# Comparing Multi-Factor Authentication Methods +I made a nice little chart comparing multi-factor authentication[1] methods from a user standpoint. Despite some of the information in the chart being slightly subjective and depending on one's threat model, I still think it's useful. So here it is: + +## Multi-Factor Authentication Chart +```chart comparing multi-factor authentication methods ++----------------+----------------+-----------------+-------------+--------------+----------------+-------------+-------------------+ +| Authentication | AI-Based | Biometric | Email Token | Hardware | Security | Text Codes | Time-Based | +| Methods | | | | Security Key | Questions | | One-Time Password | ++----------------+----------------+-----------------+-------------+--------------+----------------+-------------+-------------------+ +| Security | strong | strong | fair | strong | weak | weak | strong | ++----------------+----------------+-----------------+-------------+--------------+----------------+-------------+-------------------+ +| Personal Data | behavior | fingerprint, | email | none | personal life | phone | none | +| Exposure | patterns, | signature, | address | | details | number | | +| | device info, | iris scan, | | | | | | +| | access time, | etc. | | | | | | +| | location, etc. | | | | | | | ++----------------+----------------+-----------------+-------------+--------------+----------------+-------------+-------------------+ +| Pitfalls | can block | can be stolen | can be | easy to lose | can be | can be | must be updated | +| | user access | or legally | intercepted | | discovered | intercepted | if the online | +| | by accident | coerced by | in transit | | by information | via SIM | service is | +| | | law enforcement | | | gathering | swapping | compromised | ++----------------+----------------+-----------------+-------------+--------------+----------------+-------------+-------------------+ +``` + +## Conclusion +In terms of security, any of these options is better than nothing. But if you want maximum security with the least personal data exposure, just go with hardware security keys or time-based one-time passwords. Other authentication methods are either not very secure or they collect personal information. + + +Links: +[1: Multi-Factor Authentication](https://wikiless.org/wiki/Two-factor_authentication) -- cgit v1.2.3