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?

  • Jyek@sh.itjust.works
    1·
    5 months ago

    1. It doesn’t change anything for the company with exception to billable IT time used when the authenticator confuses users which is already high with only one authenticator.

    2. It doesn’t report location, Entra login reports location regardless of authentication method used.

    • lemmyvore@feddit.nlEnglish
      11·
      5 months ago
      1. Why should users care about the company’s billables, first of all. Secondly, it’s a red herring because there’s nothing compelling them to offer support for 3rd party authenticators or even mention them. It’s just a flip switch in the settings. Savvy users will try a 3rd party first anyway.
      2. Potayto, potato. The location info comes from and including Authenticator. What is the point of fetching location in a TOTP generator if not to check up on it?
      • Jyek@sh.itjust.works
        1·
        5 months ago

        1. The company makes the rules under which you are employed. If you don’t like it, legislate against it or find another employer. Also, like I said, there are no 3rd party authenticators that are more secure with entra ID.

        2. Like I said, M$ auth literally does not report location while authenticating. It only pulls location requests when signing in through the app to create the authentication token and even then it is not a requirement. Entra pulls location using your IP address on the device you are signing in with.