> User's authentication token was eaten by an alligator.
> User's phone, laptop, and hardware token were lost by an airline.
> User's phone and backup codes were simultaneously lost in a fire.
There should be a recovery process. However, the recovery process should be tedious and thorough enough to reliably authenticate the user and not be vulnerable to attacks. Charge a cost for the recovery process.
> because every time you have to fall back to human customer support it's $$$
Sometimes, "fuck off" can be the right answer, especially when the downside is a vulnerability that ends up costing more in fraud/reputation/legal liabilities.
House doors don't (yet?) come with a "forgot your key?" button, and the world hasn't ended, so it seems like most people are able to keep track of physical keys and have no problem paying a locksmith to break & replace the locks if needed. Safes don't come with those buttons either, and yet safe manufacturers haven't gone out of business because it takes significant cost, time & effort to open one if you lost the key (that's the whole point of it).
> House doors don't (yet?) come with a "forgot your key?" button.
Welp, I do this. I'm incredibly forgetful, adhd is a bitch, so I have a spare key in a lockbox by the door that takes a combination and give copies of my keys to my friends. And I have the combination in my password manager so even if I forget both but have my phone I'm still good. I also keep multiple copies of my credit cards and driver's license. This stuff has saved me literally hundreds of times.
I'm not sure I understand the logic of not letting someone authenticate themselves with the
A recovery process that costs $10 and actually works is great value. Assuming the recovery is for credentials that the user lost (and not Google deciding to lock them out for no reason), it seems totally fair - after all, you don't expect a locksmith to replace your locks for free either.
> User's phone, laptop, and hardware token were lost by an airline.
> User's phone and backup codes were simultaneously lost in a fire.
There should be a recovery process. However, the recovery process should be tedious and thorough enough to reliably authenticate the user and not be vulnerable to attacks. Charge a cost for the recovery process.
> because every time you have to fall back to human customer support it's $$$
Sometimes, "fuck off" can be the right answer, especially when the downside is a vulnerability that ends up costing more in fraud/reputation/legal liabilities.
House doors don't (yet?) come with a "forgot your key?" button, and the world hasn't ended, so it seems like most people are able to keep track of physical keys and have no problem paying a locksmith to break & replace the locks if needed. Safes don't come with those buttons either, and yet safe manufacturers haven't gone out of business because it takes significant cost, time & effort to open one if you lost the key (that's the whole point of it).