Hackers Hit Twitter CEO Jack Dorsey in a ‘SIM Swap’
Twitter uses SMS as a <i>single</i> factor, because you can reset the password with only access to the text message. If Twitter was using SMS only as a 2nd factor, this attack would not have worked without also knowing Jack’s password or having access to his email. Twitter’s password reset function could require an SMS code and <i>then</i> send a password reset email to complete the process.<p>Number porting should require an SMS to the existing SIM with the ability to respond NO to cancel the process and flag the request as fraud (e.g. whoever made the request on the carrier side should be flagged, to fish out compromised support reps).<p>A mandatory time delay (12 or 24 hours) could be imposed. This would slightly inconvenience people who lost their SIM and need to setup a new one. This seems like a reasonable cost&#x2F;security trade-off for losing a SIM card. Mission critical numbers should be implemented as forwarding services that separately route to the cell phone anyway, so “this number must be live right now” is not a reasonable excuse to compromise everyone’s security.<p>You could also mandate a short delay (4 business hours) and high value targets that sometimes take international flights could opt-in to longer (24&#x2F;48 hour) waiting periods. The expectation should be that 99% of users keep the default.<p>Using SMS as a second factor has <i>trade-offs</i>. This isn’t news because every single authentication mechanism presents a unique set of trade-offs in terms of cost of provisioning, ease of use, possibility of loss, possibility of spoofing, replay, etc.<p>SMS is an extremely powerful authentication factor due to its availability, cost, and accessibility. It’s worth it to shore up protection against SIM swaps not in the least because it would improve the security posture of SMS as an authentication factor. It would still not make SMS perfect. Nothing is.