9:14 a.m.
On 21. 11. 19 22:22, Stan Silvert wrote:
On 11/21/2019 9:20 AM, Marek Posolda wrote:
> On 21. 11. 19 12:02, Marek Posolda wrote:
>> I want to ask some feedback about the screen for the "Setup TOTP" .
>> I've created JIRA https://issues.jboss.org/browse/KEYCLOAK-12168 ,
>> which contains some screenshot of how currently the screen for the
>> required action for "Setup OTP" looks like. In other words, this is
>> displayed to the user at the end of the authentication when he has
>> "Setup TOTP" required action on him.
>>
>> Few questions:
>>
>> * Is the "Device name" appropriate label? Would something like
>> "Authenticator App Label" be better?
I think Device Name is fine. You could put placeholder text inside the
field that says, "My Device". This would make it clear what it is for.
Maybe. I think Stian had some issues with "Device Name" .
I see that in some cases the "Device Name" is probably fine. For example
if you have 2 phones "Xiaomi" and "Samsung" and you have Google
Authenticator installed on both phones, then you can use phone as Device
name as an authenticator. However there are some more use-cases for OTP
though, like software authenticators etc. AFAIR that was main argument
why "Device Name" is not so great.
But thanks for the feedback. I am curious for more feedback around this.
>> * Should it be more emphasized that "Authenticator
App Label" is not
>> mandatory? IMO it is currently not very clear. Also there is
>> nothing in the help-text about this input field. Maybe we can add
>> another sentence to point 3 like "Optionally provide Authenticator
>> App Label as a reference." I am not very happy with that sentence.
>> Any better ideas?
I wouldn't count on the user reading and comprehending what is in that
text. He will probably just skim that text. But it doesn't hurt to
explain a little more anyway. Suggestion for second sentence, "You can
optionally provide a Device Name to help you manage your OTP devices.
I think that
is much better than my sentence. Thanks!
In addition, label the first field "One-time Code". It currently has no
label. Second field can be labeled "Device Name (optional)".
Normally, we use an asterisk to denote required vs. not required. Then
you have something like:
"* = Required fields" as a key. But with only two fields I think that
would be overkill. So just putting "optional" in parens seems best.
Thanks, I was also thinking about adding label to both options and then
either use asterisk around "One-time Code" or instead use something like
"Device Name (optional)" on the second field. I think we will probably
go that way, unless there is better suggestion.
>> * Alternatively we can use separate screen for providing
the
>> "Authenticator App Label" . In other words, there will be just
>> single input for OTP code and than once user clicks "Submit" and
>> OTP code is successfully verified, there will be another screen
>> where he can provide "Authenticator App Label" . It seems Google
>> is using separate screen for providing labels when user register
>> Security Key.
>>
>> * Any better ideas?
>>
>> * We can possibly improve the old account console in similar manner.
>> Currently it looks like in screenshot setup-otp-account-mgmt.png .
>> Maybe we can at least change the label for "Device name" and
also
>> add another sentence to the help text?
>>
> One more point: At the bottom of the page for register TOTP, we possibly
> need the link "Try another way" or something like that. This link will
> be displayed just if user is currently trying to "Register 2nd factor
> credential" because he is required to do so, and he has some more
> alternative credential types to register (EG. WebAuthn).
If the user is unable to complete the setup process he is stuck. At the
very least, the user needs somewhere to go back to. You could make him
start the login process over. From there he might be able to choose a
social login.
BTV. That is another thing, which is planned. We will allow on all forms
to easily restart login process from the beginning
https://issues.jboss.org/browse/KEYCLOAK-12180 .
Marek
If "another way" is available then I agree that it should be provided as
an option.
> Marek
>
>> Thanks,
>>
>> Marek
>>
> _______________________________________________
> keycloak-dev mailing list
> keycloak-dev(a)lists.jboss.org
> https://lists.jboss.org/mailman/listinfo/keycloak-dev
_______________________________________________
keycloak-dev mailing list
keycloak-dev(a)lists.jboss.org
https://lists.jboss.org/mailman/listinfo/keycloak-dev