Yep we can do all kinds of stuff that the account user will not notice at all (unless of course they fail a check) while having to do an ID validation is very noticeable.
Yeah I don't wanna go back to work. whinges in corporate
When I get back I have to try to unsnarl an issue with user identification and access to client data where the user login is mediated by a separate app (SSO as part of a whole other project that is going on). The current requirements call for a verified identity from the admin user at account creation which puts the requirement for ID validation outside of the app my team is trying to implement. However, it has been pointed out (quite legitimately) that doing that puts up a barrier to account creation.
I'm of the opinion that we could track ID verified users downstream in the user profile in our app instead, which not only lets them get in the door nice and easy but also gives us future options about just how aggro we want to be with having an actual identifiable human associated with an account.
However, doing the legwork to validate my opinion is going to be a huge PITA. Also the vendor is onboarding next month so in addition to this nice little mess I get to revalidate pretty much all requirements against the actual capabilities of the chosen platform. Including the idea I have that we could incorporate an admin user ID verification step into profile creation. Le sigh. At least I have a minion to help.
And I don't know maybe the project director will swoop down accompanied by a beam of heavenly light and angelic choir to tell us we don't need ID validation at all....
I guess going back to work is a bit of a mixed bag.
Yeah like, ok my hypothetical teenage child borrowing my car, I want to be able to see where the car went and how fast it was going to get there. Because I know from personal experience that teenagers are idiots and need some level of supervision. Similar vein, stolen vehicles. So it's a feature with some utility.
I'm even OK with my insurance company offering a discount if I give them telemetry so they know I drive the speed limit and am not a risk. Though for people on the low end of the economy in a place where insurance is mandatory that can verge on extortion - so I'm only conditionally OK with it, the condition being that there must be a tier of mandatory insurance which is price capped regardless if the telemetry is granted or not. Because in a lot of places not being able to drive cuts people off from pretty much everything.
But I am absolutely not OK with the feature being so insecure that I can't lock users out, and am not notified by several channels about new users. Also I am super not OK with the car company itself getting telemetry without my express permission. I dgaf how it might improve the future product. I bought a car, I did not buy a spy.
In this particluar case though, it is complicated because the technically the ex is the actual owner of the car. I have no idea why the court didn't force him to sign it over to her, but I can see why the car corp isn't being helpful. It's deeply unfortunate that this stalker is able to keep doing his thing via the car but at the same time regardless of how many unlockable doors the car has, it's his behavior that is the proximate issue. Like yeah absolutely get the car fixed, but how about also the legal system steps up and makes this entitled loser knock it off?
Ozymati @ Ozymati @lemmy.nz Posts 0Comments 299Joined 2 yr. ago
Finally, a mayor doing something I approve of