7 ms·

GitHub is slowly rolling out feature over moe than a year [1], which will have positive impact on overall IT security. Spending 1 minute setting up 2FA is real

GitHub is slowly rolling out feature over moe than a year [1], which will have positive impact on overall IT security. Spending 1 minute setting up 2FA is really not a big deal. [1] https://github.blog/news-insights/product-news/raising-the-bar-for-software-security-github-2fa-begins-march-13/ https://github.blog/news-insights/product-news/raising-the-b...

w0m 2y ago
I wonder how much of the negative connotation in ~every GitHub thread comes from the MS buyout vs the actual topic under discussion. Do people really dislike 2FA on something as important as source hosting?
- arp242 2y ago
  > something as important as source hosting? But it's not important for a lot of people. Lots of people just create the occasional issue or some such. Almost no one is a maintainer of something important. And overall it's just a hassle that adds zero security for me; I just have the tokens in the password manager next to the passwords (where else do I store it? I just have my laptop). It's something that should be the user choice, based on how important the account is, personal factors, etc.
- blueflow 2y ago
  2FA is a bigger problem to me than Microsoft. I'm not having electronics on me most of the time. If i have to log in to Github from somewhere else, i call my landline and have SO read the 2FA code to me. But since this is cumbersome i try to get my stuff done without the Github login.
  - ebichu63 2y ago
    Google "TOTP tokens on my wrist with the smartest dumb watch" for a fun project.
    - blueflow 2y ago
      I meant "no electronics" literally.
- pmontra 2y ago
  I do dislike it. I'd take back my only occasional contribution to a project not to be bothered by 2FA and I'm not submitting issues anymore to anything. Basically I'm using github in read only mode without logging in. When another customer of mine will use github I'll be back on it and I'll use 2FA, but at least they'll be paying me for the trouble. All my current customers are on bitbucket.
- 000ooo000 2y ago
  I would actually be far more frustrated by mandatory 2FA at login than if my GitHub account were compromised. I use it to star projects, and because you can't code search without being logged in; it's a bottom-tier account for me and 2FA means I'll probably just not bother. Why can't they gate sensitive features behind 2FA? As an aside, I'm surprised I've never seen an async authentication system whereby PW gets you in, 2FA code is sent, and you can continue accessing the system in a limited way until you submit your 2FA code, instead of sitting on some intermediary page waiting a few minutes for the code to arrive.
- jjav 2y ago
  > Do people really dislike 2FA on something as important as source hosting? "important" is a per-person individual decision. A phrase that used to be very common is "mechanism, not policy". The role of a vendor is supposed to be to enable mechanisms so that customers can implement whichever policy that best fits their needs. The role of a customer is to choose and implement the policy that best works for them personally, using the mechanisms that the vendor provides. It is fundamentally wrong for a vendor to impose policy, that's not their job. Nor do they have the information to correctly make that decision. Some (few) people have important source code in their github account. I'd highly encourage those people to enable 2FA. Most people don't have anything important that anyone else uses, so adding the overhead of 2FA for them is beyond silly and purely obnoxious.
  - MattPalmer1086 2y ago
    Very well put. I work in info sec and I find Githubs 2FA requirement completely obnoxious. Because you can't use passwords anymore, you have to set up tokens, which are often stored in the clear. It's actually less secure for me than a reasonable password and a lot more hassle to maintain. Should be a choice I make. I use GitHub a lot less now than I did before, it's a pain to use now. Maybe I'll move to something else that respects my choice and threat model.
  - w0m 2y ago
    > The role of a vendor is supposed to be to enable mechanisms so that customers can implement whichever policy that best fits their needs. this is where GitHub isn't a vendor; it's almost a social network as one account getting compromised could potentially cascade through projects. If you want to manage the risk profile that best fits you; you'd localize on GitHub Enterprise or other selfhosting.
miohtama 2y ago
Also if you really really hate two-factor authentication, e.g. due to psychological change resistance, there are multiple good alternatives like Bitbucket or Gitlab. Nobody is forcing you to use Github, and usually people do not even pay for it.
- danaris 2y ago
  If you're interested in contributing to projects that are hosted on GitHub, but aren't in a position to be making decisions about whether to migrate them, then yeah, you're forced to use GitHub.
  - eesmith 2y ago
    I've given up on using GitHub. Nothing else I use requires 2FA, I don't have a smart phone, and figuring out an alternative just to post bug reports is a waste of my time, so I've taken to emailing the developers instead.
    - JasserInicide 2y ago
      The complete lack of consistency in MFA requirements just show no one knows what the fuck they're doing. DoorDash: Every time I need to enter an SMS code. UberEats: Same thing, SMS code every time. Grubhub: No MFA ever. Wonderful. Twitch: Every couple days I need to enter a code sent to my email (because I won't give them my phone number which they really really want me to give them). Reddit: no MFA requirement...for now. Given how fucking garbage they've become I wouldn't be surprised if they start enforcing it soon. Amazon: no MFA requirement despite sometimes asking. GMail: no MFA requirement despite also asking.
    - latexr 2y ago
      > I don't have a smart phone GitHub’s 2FA gives you the option to use SMS. But even for the authenticator method you don’t need a phone, most decent password managers nowadays support saving (and auto-filling) 2FA tokens. There’s also the option to print/write down the one-time codes. Though the latter would admittedly be a bother if you log out frequently. Point being there’re many ways to go about it.
diego_sandoval 2y ago
It somewhat breaks my workflow of downloading my (encrypted) password database from a private repo on GitHub when setting up a new computer. The keys used to generate TOTP codes are in the password database itself, so I can't use TOTP to log into GitHub. So I have an email account without 2FA that receives the Github 2FA code.

w0m 2y ago

I wonder how much of the negative connotation in ~every GitHub thread comes from the MS buyout vs the actual topic under discussion. Do people really dislike 2FA on something as important as source hosting?

arp242 2y ago
> something as important as source hosting? But it's not important for a lot of people. Lots of people just create the occasional issue or some such. Almost no one is a maintainer of something important. And overall it's just a hassle that adds zero security for me; I just have the tokens in the password manager next to the passwords (where else do I store it? I just have my laptop). It's something that should be the user choice, based on how important the account is, personal factors, etc.
blueflow 2y ago
2FA is a bigger problem to me than Microsoft. I'm not having electronics on me most of the time. If i have to log in to Github from somewhere else, i call my landline and have SO read the 2FA code to me. But since this is cumbersome i try to get my stuff done without the Github login.
- ebichu63 2y ago
  Google "TOTP tokens on my wrist with the smartest dumb watch" for a fun project.
  - blueflow 2y ago
    I meant "no electronics" literally.
pmontra 2y ago
I do dislike it. I'd take back my only occasional contribution to a project not to be bothered by 2FA and I'm not submitting issues anymore to anything. Basically I'm using github in read only mode without logging in. When another customer of mine will use github I'll be back on it and I'll use 2FA, but at least they'll be paying me for the trouble. All my current customers are on bitbucket.
000ooo000 2y ago
I would actually be far more frustrated by mandatory 2FA at login than if my GitHub account were compromised. I use it to star projects, and because you can't code search without being logged in; it's a bottom-tier account for me and 2FA means I'll probably just not bother. Why can't they gate sensitive features behind 2FA? As an aside, I'm surprised I've never seen an async authentication system whereby PW gets you in, 2FA code is sent, and you can continue accessing the system in a limited way until you submit your 2FA code, instead of sitting on some intermediary page waiting a few minutes for the code to arrive.
jjav 2y ago
> Do people really dislike 2FA on something as important as source hosting? "important" is a per-person individual decision. A phrase that used to be very common is "mechanism, not policy". The role of a vendor is supposed to be to enable mechanisms so that customers can implement whichever policy that best fits their needs. The role of a customer is to choose and implement the policy that best works for them personally, using the mechanisms that the vendor provides. It is fundamentally wrong for a vendor to impose policy, that's not their job. Nor do they have the information to correctly make that decision. Some (few) people have important source code in their github account. I'd highly encourage those people to enable 2FA. Most people don't have anything important that anyone else uses, so adding the overhead of 2FA for them is beyond silly and purely obnoxious.
- MattPalmer1086 2y ago
  Very well put. I work in info sec and I find Githubs 2FA requirement completely obnoxious. Because you can't use passwords anymore, you have to set up tokens, which are often stored in the clear. It's actually less secure for me than a reasonable password and a lot more hassle to maintain. Should be a choice I make. I use GitHub a lot less now than I did before, it's a pain to use now. Maybe I'll move to something else that respects my choice and threat model.
- w0m 2y ago
  > The role of a vendor is supposed to be to enable mechanisms so that customers can implement whichever policy that best fits their needs. this is where GitHub isn't a vendor; it's almost a social network as one account getting compromised could potentially cascade through projects. If you want to manage the risk profile that best fits you; you'd localize on GitHub Enterprise or other selfhosting.

miohtama 2y ago

Also if you really really hate two-factor authentication, e.g. due to psychological change resistance, there are multiple good alternatives like Bitbucket or Gitlab. Nobody is forcing you to use Github, and usually people do not even pay for it.

danaris 2y ago
If you're interested in contributing to projects that are hosted on GitHub, but aren't in a position to be making decisions about whether to migrate them, then yeah, you're forced to use GitHub.
- eesmith 2y ago
  I've given up on using GitHub. Nothing else I use requires 2FA, I don't have a smart phone, and figuring out an alternative just to post bug reports is a waste of my time, so I've taken to emailing the developers instead.
  - JasserInicide 2y ago
    The complete lack of consistency in MFA requirements just show no one knows what the fuck they're doing. DoorDash: Every time I need to enter an SMS code. UberEats: Same thing, SMS code every time. Grubhub: No MFA ever. Wonderful. Twitch: Every couple days I need to enter a code sent to my email (because I won't give them my phone number which they really really want me to give them). Reddit: no MFA requirement...for now. Given how fucking garbage they've become I wouldn't be surprised if they start enforcing it soon. Amazon: no MFA requirement despite sometimes asking. GMail: no MFA requirement despite also asking.
  - latexr 2y ago
    > I don't have a smart phone GitHub’s 2FA gives you the option to use SMS. But even for the authenticator method you don’t need a phone, most decent password managers nowadays support saving (and auto-filling) 2FA tokens. There’s also the option to print/write down the one-time codes. Though the latter would admittedly be a bother if you log out frequently. Point being there’re many ways to go about it.

diego_sandoval 2y ago

It somewhat breaks my workflow of downloading my (encrypted) password database from a private repo on GitHub when setting up a new computer. The keys used to generate TOTP codes are in the password database itself, so I can't use TOTP to log into GitHub. So I have an email account without 2FA that receives the Github 2FA code.