Slashdot Mirror

← Back to Stories (view on slashdot.org)

Facebook Adds Two-Factor Authentication

Posted by timothy on from the your-name-and-your-real-name dept.

angry tapir writes "To help its hundreds of millions of users prevent unauthorized access to their accounts, Facebook has added an optional verification step to its log-in process. The new security feature, called Login Approvals, is a form of two-factor authentication."

15 of 124 comments (clear)

  1. Security? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 4, Funny

    That's like putting a steel door on a straw house...

    1. Re:Security? by Hultis · · Score: 3, Insightful

      More like putting a steel door next to the regular one most people will still use.

  2. Protect your MafiaFarmPetVilleWars! by L4t3r4lu5 · · Score: 3, Insightful

    Give us your telephone number.

    This isn't creepy at all.

    --
    Finally had enough. Come see us over at https://soylentnews.org/
    1. Re:Protect your MafiaFarmPetVilleWars! by dragonhunter21 · · Score: 3, Informative

      Actually Google's uses a special app, Google Authenticator. No phone number required.

      --
      Sent from my CR-48
  3. Let me guess... by msauve · · Score: 4, Funny

    This is Facebook, so the two factors are username and password.

    --
    "National Security is the chief cause of national insecurity." - Celine's First Law
    1. Re:Let me guess... by rsmith-mac · · Score: 3, Funny

      Passwords are too hard to remember, particularly for the hardcore Facebook addicts. Instead it will be your username and your mother's name, that way you can quickly look it up on your friends list should you forget it.

    2. Re:Let me guess... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 3, Funny

      With every app and advertising maker having full access anyway, I think this is what I think they have in mind. Now with TWO locks!

  4. Re:FaceBook adds Two Factor Authentication by curtisk · · Score: 5, Insightful

    "Because if they steal your private data, we can't sell it to them!"

    Thats so sadly funny... Facebook isn't even the least bit shy anymore, "just give us you cell/mobile number, its for safety!" I wonder what new data correlations and connections they can now make with that extra tidbit of data in that database version of you(in the database version of the world)

    --

    Sehr geehrter Toilettenbenutzer!

  5. Extra layer of security by ray_mccrae · · Score: 5, Funny

    I heard that the two form authentication will involve both your password and verification that you've posted a derogatory story about Google to your blog.

  6. WTF is the point? by geekmux · · Score: 4, Insightful

    "To help its hundreds of millions of users prevent unauthorized access to their accounts..."

    Gee, that's nice Farcebook. Now, what exactly are you going to do about your privacy policies that change with the wind, forcing users to constantly monitor their settings to prevent "authorized" access?

    Hard to feel safe in the car when you don't trust the driver no matter how many seat belts you have on.

  7. Re:Facebook stupidity.. by icebraining · · Score: 4, Insightful

    So would it be better for them not to implement it at all because you don't want to use it?

    Lots of people 1) don't live in the US, and therefore doesn't pay for incoming SMS, 2) have SMS packages or 3) don't mind paying, since it's not for every login but only when a new device is used.

    If you don't want to use it, nobody forces you to.

    --
    Dilbert RSS feed
  8. Re:Facebook stupidity.. by ledow · · Score: 5, Insightful

    I have to say - paying to receive SMS is possibly the most stupid thing I've ever heard anyone agree to. It was back when mobile phones first came out and still is now.

    The problem is not Facebook there - the problem is people who tolerate a stupid system where you can end up paying for something you never asked for.

  9. they immediately publish your cell # by Loco3KGT · · Score: 3, Informative

    Worth noting - when you supply a phone number (btw, my Google Voice number didn't work at all for this.. had to use my actual mobile #).. they immediately publish it on your profile.

    Thanks Facebook! (i immediately removed it and disabled the feature)

    --
    Blessed be he who reads this post, Cursed be he who tells my boss.
  10. Re:Facebook stupidity.. by Chemisor · · Score: 3, Insightful

    Ok, wise guy; what are we supposed to do about it? There are only four carriers in the US, and they all charge for receiving text messages. Obviously, you only have two options: either not own a cellphone, or to start your own carrier. Not owning a cellphone does not hurt the carrier, since they have plenty of other customers who don't mind paying for text messages, or just can't live without a cellphone. No carrier will miss you. They will, in fact, want you to leave, since you are a cheapskate who does not make them money by signing up for an expensive monthly contract. Heck, you probably use prepaid, which is not making them any money at all! Your other option of starting your own carrier is not viable due to lack of capital. You'll need to build a few million cell towers, since if you just rent from the existing carriers you'll have to conform to their pricing plans or lose money. Who will lend you the money? Nobody. So, as you can see, we're all pretty much screwed and can do nothing about it.

  11. Re:Facebook stupidity.. by icebraining · · Score: 3, Informative

    Largest segment? You do know that the vast majority of the world, including the US, still uses more feature phones than smartphones?

    Not to mention that for most people if you know they're FB password you can probably access their email too; from password reuse to finding their secret answer (like your candidate for vicepresident), it's almost useless as a second authentication mechanism.

    And you don't need a $30/month plan to receive one SMS a month, if that. How many times do you realistically use FB from a new device?

    --
    Dilbert RSS feed