[members-discuss] Webauthn

Hi Bogdan,

\+1 for this idea from me.

I use my physical key wherever possible, and find it a good idea to have the option there for anyone who has them.

Best regards,
Jori Vanneste

Junior Network Engineer
Openfactory GmbH - AS58299
\+32 460 24 25 26


\-------- Original Message --------
On Oct 2, 2020, 02:18, Bogdan I. < admin at redcluster.net> wrote:

>
>
>
> Hello
>
> What would be your opinion of implementing Webauthn / U2F by security
> keys for the RIPE NCC website's two factor authentication, in addition
> to the current TOTP system?
>
> The current TOTP based system works fine, but i find using a physical
> security key to be more convenient and more secure.
>
> \--
> Bogdan Ionescu
> Redcluster LTD
>
>
> \_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_
> members-discuss mailing list
> members-discuss at ripe.net
> https://mailman.ripe.net/
> Unsubscribe: https://lists.ripe.net/mailman/options/members-discuss/tyrasuki%40pm.me
>
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <https://www.ripe.net/ripe/mail/archives/members-discuss/attachments/20201002/fd6fa51b/attachment.html>
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: signature.asc
Type: application/pgp-signature
Size: 839 bytes
Desc: OpenPGP digital signature
URL: <https://www.ripe.net/ripe/mail/archives/members-discuss/attachments/20201002/fd6fa51b/attachment.sig>