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
On Thu, Jul 07, 2016 at 10:30:21AM +0200, Sumit Bose wrote:
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
The prompts were changes as Nathaniel suggested and the basic sanity checks worked with this patch. I'm going to push with Nathaniel's RB.
On Thu, Jul 07, 2016 at 12:39:01PM +0200, Jakub Hrozek wrote:
The prompts were changes as Nathaniel suggested and the basic sanity checks worked with this patch. I'm going to push with Nathaniel's RB.
* master: 78027feeb56d6fe216f699be86a4716aaef3f628
sssd-devel@lists.fedorahosted.org
-
Jakub Hrozek -
Sumit Bose