Yeah, they overlap since I did whole hour (120 30-second codes). I didn’t know specific time, so it’s 2 pages, 3 hours, 42 minutes and 30 seconds.

Credit goes to oathtool (and LibreOffice Write).
Font: Liberation Mono

      • Sanctus@anarchist.nexus
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        1
        ·
        edit-2
        54 minutes ago

        Something you know, this paper will quickly become something everyone knows the minute the weakest link in your company security pipeline gets a hold of one.

    • u/lukmly013 💾 (lemmy.sdf.org)@lemmy.sdf.orgOP
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      25
      arrow-down
      1
      ·
      edit-2
      21 hours ago

      No.
      Password I remember is the 1st factor, a valid code from this list (which depends on time) is the second factor.

      It’s same as using the phone, except that here they were precomputed and on paper for some time span. None of these are valid now (well, maybe there is one, it’s a bunch of number combinations after all), and you don’t have the private key to generate more.
      Say, you can tell that at 10:02:30 UTC the valid code was 262887, but you don’t know what it is now.

      That’s the advantage of TOTP, they expire. If it were plain HOTP, I’d only need 1 code at a time anyway.

      https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Time-based_one-time_password

      • Sanctus@anarchist.nexus
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        10
        arrow-down
        3
        ·
        21 hours ago

        It does. If you were to lose this paper while it were active any hacker could access your account. At least your phone has a PIN or pattern they also have to guess. This is just waiting there to be social engineered away from you (if it were still active, which good thing its not)

          • Sanctus@anarchist.nexus
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            3
            arrow-down
            4
            ·
            19 hours ago

            I believe most passwords are brute forced or phished nowadays, so unless you have some password manager changing your passwords every hour or so the password is probably pretty moot if the employee has to set it.

            • u/lukmly013 💾 (lemmy.sdf.org)@lemmy.sdf.orgOP
              link
              fedilink
              English
              arrow-up
              9
              ·
              19 hours ago

              Brute-forcing would take some bit of time. If the 6 digit code, 3 combinations of which are likely valid at a time becomes your only factor, you’ve already lost. Long randomly generated combinations are unrealistic to brute-force. For now at least.

              And here’s a screenshot from when I brute-forced the 2FA to my Lemmy account because I trusted the wrong app (Cisco Duo and its backups without version control wiping everything after turning on older device):
              6 digits isn’t much.

              Also I hate how it’s implemented everywhere. We figured out that telling someone whether the password or username is incorrect is a bad thing, so now we do “username or password incorrect”. But what about 2FA? Username is easy to get if targeting a specific person.
              If you can get to 2FA, you know the password was correct. That’s the case basically everywhere. Then it’s just 6 digits to guess. And typically you also only get notified about logins when successful. Too late at that point.
              My wish would be to take both password and 2FA code at once, and just return “password or 2FA invalid” if one or both of them are wrong.

              • Sanctus@anarchist.nexus
                link
                fedilink
                English
                arrow-up
                4
                ·
                18 hours ago

                I wish hardware tokens or something were more prevalent or anything that doesn’t require me to visit 2 separate pages (login then 2fa) to login everytime. All the services I use at work timeout at ~15 minutes and it can be a slog. Software authenticators are convenient to keep track of but theres got to be a better way.

    • MotoAsh@piefed.social
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      5
      arrow-down
      1
      ·
      21 hours ago

      aaaaalmost completely. Knowing a second piece of information technically counts, it’s just like … about as secure as using someone’s SSN for the 2fa, which is absolutely stupid.

      • u/lukmly013 💾 (lemmy.sdf.org)@lemmy.sdf.orgOP
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        7
        ·
        21 hours ago

        about as secure as using someone’s SSN for the 2fa

        I’ll give you one better. For a certain thing, the university I attend decided to use birth numbers as a password. And that was the only factor.
        Mind you, in Slovakia, the birth number consists of birth date + random 4 digits.
        Much safety.

        Anyway, SSN doesn’t expire in less than 4 hours.

        • MotoAsh@piefed.social
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          4
          ·
          edit-2
          21 hours ago

          That’s why it’s ‘about’ as stupid. Many US services only really need basic PII to at least set up an account, which is scarily low levels of security.

      • yetAnotherUser@discuss.tchncs.de
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        4
        arrow-down
        1
        ·
        edit-2
        18 hours ago

        No? Two separate pieces of information aren’t two factors.

        But this would be the factor “ownership” and “knowledge”. Anyone attempting to hack into OP’s account needs both the paper (or a copy thereof) AND the password. Just like withdrawing money from ab ATM requires the card and a PIN.

        Though the fact you can easily copy the paper makes it a pretty weak “ownership” factor. Just like how using eye color would be a pretty weak “identity” factor.

      • Sanctus@anarchist.nexus
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        3
        arrow-down
        1
        ·
        21 hours ago

        You know employees are taping this to their cubicle lol all it would take is some white hat grabbing it off your desk before you all have to do special training from IT

          • Sanctus@anarchist.nexus
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            2
            ·
            edit-2
            21 hours ago

            Most 2FA is software on someone’s phone, like Microsoft Authenticator. Its not different from leaving a device. It is very different from leaving your phone.

            • u/lukmly013 💾 (lemmy.sdf.org)@lemmy.sdf.orgOP
              link
              fedilink
              English
              arrow-up
              1
              ·
              edit-2
              20 hours ago

              I don’t follow what you’re trying to say here. (The last 2 sentences contradict in my mind)

              Anyway, phone vs this tomfoolery, it might not be more/less secure, just different.
              What’s on paper is all there will be, as it doesn’t include the secret for generating additional codes.
              Phone has that, but also has a screen lock. Whether that is easy to bypass will depend on environment, but after the first unlock, it is at least realistic.
              Plus you have people like my father who go by “no lock, nothing to hide”.

              For immediate exploit, paper looses.
              For later persistent exploitation, phone looses.

              Also, no one’s going to have endless scrolls of codes like this. 2 pages for less than 4 hours. Round that up to 2 hours per page, that would be 12 pages per day, 360 pages per month, 4,380 pages per year.
              I had to do this, because it was a requirement (they even recommended to print out the password). Actually, they didn’t mention 2FA, just to print out the password (and no use of personal devices). This is the best I could do given the environment.

              • Sanctus@anarchist.nexus
                link
                fedilink
                English
                arrow-up
                3
                ·
                19 hours ago

                There are purposed 2FA devices that aren’t your phone. Leaving one of those laying around is about the same security level as leaving these papers is what that says. Either way that sounds like ass to deal with regardless of how secure it is. Give me Aegis or give me death.