On Wed, Jul 06, 2016 at 10:03:12AM -0400, Nathaniel McCallum wrote:
> On Wed, 2016-07-06 at 15:55 +0200, Sumit Bose wrote:
> > On Wed, Jul 06, 2016 at 09:03:45AM -0400, Nathaniel McCallum wrote:
> > >
> > > Patch WFM and looks clean. My only question is on the overall
> >
> > Thank you very much for testing.
> >
> > >
> > > prompting.
> > >
> > > Currently we have:
> > > * 1FA:
> > > - "Password"
> > > * 2FA (required):
> > > - "First Factor"
> > > - "Second Factor"
> > > * 2FA (optional):
> > > - "First Factor or Password"
> > > - "Second Factor, press return for Password authentication"
> > >
> > > This all seems a little verbose to me. It also seems like it
> > > reveals
> > > technical details that don't matter and/or might confuse the user.
> > >
> > > Is there a reason not to do the following?
> > >
> > > * 1FA:
> > > - "Password"
> > > * 2FA (required):
> > > - "Password"
> > > - "Token
> > > Code"
> > > * 2FA (optional):
> > > - "Password"
> > > - "Token Code (optional)"
> > >
> > > This seems to me simpler, shorter and more descriptive.
> > > Alternatively:
> > >
> > > * 1FA:
> > > - "Password"
> > > * 2FA (required):
> > > - "Password"
> > > -
> > > "Second Factor"
> > > * 2FA (optional):
> > > - "Password"
> > > - "Second Factor
> > > (optional)"
> > >
> > > Whatever we decide to do, this patch has my ACK. So feel free to
> > > just
> > > change the string and merge it.
> >
> > When the 2FA prompting was added in the previous release I think I
> > asked
> > for alternative suggestions as well. My main reasons, especially with
> > the 'First Factor' prompt were first to make the user aware that
> > something new is happen. New in the sense that the user should be
> > prepared to enter the second factor in a new prompt and not put the
> > combined password in the 'Password' prompt as he was used to before.
> >
> > And second I wasn't sure if users are aware that the first factor is
> > typically their long term password. Iirc the first factor with RSA
> > tokens are typically referred to as PIN and asking for a password
> > might
> > confuse the users.
> >
> > Maybe we should reach out to UX designers to see what they recommend?
>
> Let's just go with this:
>
> * 1FA:
> - "Password"
> * 2FA:
> - "First Factor"
> - "Second Factor"
> * 2FA, optional:
> - "First Factor"
> - "Second Factor (optional)"
>
> We already implement the first two cases, so adding one word is just a
> small change.
New version attached with the prompts changed accordingly.
bye,
Sumit