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?
While I understand this… Why not just refuse to support and NOT remove the capability for all those who don’t need support and work just fine with their own? It’s not like TOTP isn’t a solved problem at this point.
Eg. “we only support MS auth, If you choose to use your own you will not receive any company support.”
Because that shit only works in fantasy land. If you can use it, employees WILL expect support and will repeatedly raise hell if they don’t get it. Is a losing battle.
The option to use TOTP is already well hidden. It’s not like someone who does not know what he is looking for and uses an Authenticator already will accidentally select it.
Glad to know my company, and the companies I contract for are fantasy land then.
And they will get it if they use the company default options.
Nothing about this is losing. I’m CIO for 3 separate companies (2 by contract). None of them have issues with this type of policy. We do bare minimum to not limit the toolset they can use and support a specific set of tools that we like the best. That’s it. Those who are smart enough to use their own tools clearly know enough about IT to make good decisions that we can trust. The rest use the default tools… and we support those tools explicitly.
More importantly, we’re not shitting on those who ARE making good decisions overall, but just have a preference. That makes the employees feel heard and keeps them happy. Keeping them happier keeps everyone more productive.