Security Basics mailing list archives
RE: Multi-Factor Authentication Concern
From: zenmasterbob123 () gmail com
Date: 10 Aug 2007 17:50:29 -0000
The only way I can think of that this would be of any use at all, and this is stretching it, is if Jim, Mike, and Sally are part of some kind of three-person intergity plan. If you have something so significant that it is too sensitive to trust to only two people, and you don't want any single person to be able to access it on their own, you might set up something where NONE of them can get in without Jim's card, Mike's eyeball, and Sally's number sequence. However, that really isn't what most people are talking about when they refer to multi-factor authentication.
Current thread:
- RE: Multi-Factor Authentication Concern, (continued)
- RE: Multi-Factor Authentication Concern Tony Reusser (Aug 17)
- RE: Multi-Factor Authentication Concern Mngadi, Simphiwe (SS) (Aug 15)
- Re: Multi-Factor Authentication Concern Kevin Wilcox (Aug 16)
- RE: Multi-Factor Authentication Concern Kandala, Nham (Aug 10)
- Re: Multi-Factor Authentication Concern Chris Barber (Aug 13)
- Re: Multi-Factor Authentication Concern Francois Yang (Aug 13)
- RE: Multi-Factor Authentication Concern Webster, William P CTR FNMOC, N661 (Aug 14)
- Re: Multi-Factor Authentication Concern Roch (Aug 15)
- RE: Multi-Factor Authentication Concern Uber Wannabe (Aug 16)
- Re: Multi-Factor Authentication Concern Francois Yang (Aug 13)
- Re: Multi-Factor Authentication Concern Yves Bourdic (Aug 15)
- RE: Multi-Factor Authentication Concern zenmasterbob123 (Aug 10)
- Re: RE: Multi-Factor Authentication Concern subconscienceless (Aug 14)