> To recap, our facial recognition authentication required 1) the user’s mobile phone, and 2) their selfie. We omitted crucial research on both fronts.
So point #1 failed because the work phone is not considered to be "something they have", a "possession", correct?
Thank you for sharing, insightful story! (and very painful at the time, I imagine!)
Hi David, it wasn't that the mobile phone wasn't considered a factor of authentication - the 'something they have' technically; rather that it wasn't accepted by our users' employers whose money is ultimately at stake. So it's a classic case of the tech being ready but the market wasn't.
> To recap, our facial recognition authentication required 1) the user’s mobile phone, and 2) their selfie. We omitted crucial research on both fronts.
So point #1 failed because the work phone is not considered to be "something they have", a "possession", correct?
Thank you for sharing, insightful story! (and very painful at the time, I imagine!)
Hi David, it wasn't that the mobile phone wasn't considered a factor of authentication - the 'something they have' technically; rather that it wasn't accepted by our users' employers whose money is ultimately at stake. So it's a classic case of the tech being ready but the market wasn't.