That's the same stance I have and why I'm torn. The little quirk here—where it makes slightly more sense—is that they received a legal notice at one point (from the US Government) about my account, there are plenty of online articles to corroborate me as me, and I have a fancy prison release ID that can help me identify me. Unfortunately this context is probably lost on the individuals who work their Zendesk.

The policies are rather draconian as others have mentioned. Anyone could be the victim of theft; mine just has an awkward paper trail attached to it.

▲

abxyz 6 hours ago | parent | next [-]

I think the disconnect between you and GitHub support is that you're positioning this as a problem of proving your identity whereas for GitHub support it is a policy. The GitHub policy is: you lose your 2FA, you lose your account. Verifying your identity is not relevant. GitHub provides extensive tooling to protect your account (multiple methods of 2FA, recovery codes etc.) and so from their perspective, while this is deeply unfortunate, the policy is very clear and allowing you access to the account would be a major security issue (not for your account specifically, but for GitHub as an organization).

edit: https://docs.github.com/en/site-policy/other-site-policies/g...

▲

ryandrake 6 hours ago | parent | next [-]

These (for good reason) draconian policies are the reason I am still hesitant to embrace 2FA. I understand the significant improvement in your security posture, and I would not want someone not-me to be able to reset my credentials. But the failure mode is just too catastrophic. You lose one thing and you are shit out of luck.

We need something better. I don't know what it would be.

▲

saint_yossarian 5 hours ago | parent | next [-]

You can use a TOTP authenticator with backup support (I use Aegis on Android, and less critical ones in Bitwarden), and backup your recovery codes.

▲

alwa 5 hours ago | parent | prev [-]

I for one would appreciate the option to put an ID on file ahead of time, at least for important stuff like this. I like digital-only accounts for play, but for work stuff with real-world consequence, I’d like to link it to a real-world identity system…

Not unlike the signature cards banks used long ago, I guess.

Sure, maybe somebody motivated could defraud the government into issuing them a replacement ID in my name. But that’s big boy crime, not a casual “bribe a retail employee to SIM swap” kind of undertaking.

Sure, there are issues of access to government ID systems, and I know anything touching government names / “show me your papers” raises hackers’ hackles—I’m not saying require it, just that I’d choose it if it were a MFA option of last resort.

▲

eterm 5 hours ago | parent | next [-]

That's how you turn 2fa into single factor authentication ( The ID ).

GitHub is such a large attack vector for the whole planet, that I understand their stance.

GitHub support a "recovery code" more secure than government ID. Print it out, store on USB, store on QR, etc, and stick it in at least one secure safe.

▲

nerdsniper 5 hours ago | parent | prev | next [-]

The issue is less about having an ID on file, and more about verifying ID. In a world of excellent real-time deepfakes, how would GitHub verify ID at scale?

A fake ID is pretty easy to create, along with a fake face for a video chat where you can hold up your fake ID.

	▲	filearts 5 hours ago \| parent [-]
		An idea might be to require a financially meaningful deposit to pursue an account recovery like this. The deposit would be forfeit if the identity verification failed. Though now that I write this, it creates a perverse incentive for a company to collect deposits and deny account recovery.

▲

joshmn 5 hours ago | parent | prev [-]

> I for one would appreciate the option to put an ID on file ahead of time, at least for important stuff like this.

I'm at that point of agreement. I don't want to say "national SSO ID" because that can get really Orwellian obviously. Being able to put an ID on file is a reasonable ask.

▲

em-bee 5 hours ago | parent [-]

a passport is orwellian? i don't really get this fear of government issued IDs. if your government is so bad that it will abuse IDs for surveillance, then your government is the problem, and not having a national ID is not going to protect you.

▲

xp84 an hour ago | parent [-]

Someone explained this to me the other day in a way that helped me understand the concern better.

Not already having a ton of easy and effective choke points on the whole citizenry (which such a card would eventually grow into due to its usefulness) is a safeguard against wannabe tyrants being confident they can crush dissent easily and thus to them seizing power in the first place. Just like I wouldn’t steal a car with a manual transmission because I know I wouldn’t be able to drive it successfully, and certainly not well enough to outrun the consequences.

If I were a fascist I’d be a lot more brazen if I knew that I could switch off every dissenter’s ability to travel, work, or even buy food, in an instant.

	▲	shermantanktop 4 minutes ago \| parent [-]
		What if you were a fascist who exercised influence over Experian and TransUnion, the airlines, and of course the TSA? The horse has left the barn already.

▲

michaelmior 5 hours ago | parent | prev | next [-]

Part of the problem here is that there is no prior association of an identity with an account. So proving who you are is somewhat irrelevant since even if the account has your name, email, and photo, that's no guarantee that the account was created by you. If identity verification were required ahead of time, then perhaps verifying identity after loss of access could be reasonable recovery method. But of course there are many reasons why requiring such verification is problematic.

▲

amatecha 5 hours ago | parent | prev | next [-]

Someone high enough in the food chain at GitHub can override that policy at their whim. I have personally had my day saved by that very "loophole" in another "lost access to an online service" situation in the past.

▲

MrGilbert 6 hours ago | parent | prev [-]

I'd assume that there is simply no "ok, this individual got released from prison and can proof everything" policy in place, and that might be the real issue here. Big organizations begin to tumble once you request something where there are no policies in place.

▲

hluska 6 hours ago | parent | prev [-]

I’m not sure that blaming tech support for not understanding context is the best approach here. The other sides of that context, which are understandable from their point of view, is that you were charged with some serious crimes. There’s a large delta between the charges and the conviction, but you’ve got some scary words written about you online. Secondarily, GitHub has policy so whereas you’re coming at it from a position of being correct, they’re in a position where they have to break policy. That’s a big risk.

Your best bet would likely be legal. US Federal law imposes some strict rules on lawyers for identity verification to combat money laundering so attorneys have a legally recognized toolkit to verify identity. Having a third party who works for you in the mix could help. Though again, it would involve breaking their policy so this would be a decision made several layers above Zendesk access.

Otherwise, I think this is doing precisely what 2FA is meant to do. It’s not okay for you and you’ve clearly lost a lot because of this, but with the current threat environment, GitHub has to be very careful especially with 2FA. From their point of view, there likely isn’t that big of a gap between your interactions and interactions with people who are trying to take over accounts. A lawyer may not work, but it sure changes that equation.