When I say “two-factor authentication" or "MFA" (multi-factor authentication) you probably feel like they’re the same thing.
And to be honest? That’s pretty understandable. Both 2FA and MFA are quite similar! They’re both mainly used to block unauthorized access. But the fact is they are both two different things altogether.
Especially in today’s day and age - the finance, SaaS, and medical industries, they can make a huge difference. For industries like these, multiple levels of security have never been more essential.
However, in the case of 2FA vs. MFA, there are certain aspects of security worth paying attention to when industry compliance is essential for your company.
.png)
Want to know which is better? We'll talk about that and give you some insight as to why that is.
2FA vs MFA: What’s the Difference?
2FA typically only uses a password and a secondary code while MFA has a broader range of login routes. Aside from this MFA may have only two types of login methods required or even more than two - which makes all 2FA technically MFA.
This means 2FA is less flexible and a little weaker to some specific attacks like your SMS being intercepted.
MFA, on the other hand, has more authentication routes or ways you can log in. Or, in other words, MFA has more ways to authenticate and additional layers if required, allowing for multiple ways to log in. Some of these include ways like biometrics or hardware tokens.
That aside, by using MFA solutions companies can have stronger, more adaptive security measures. This helps protect against a more diverse range of threats. However, even with this, there are other areas worth that you should pay attention to. When picking between 2FA and MFA - it ultimately comes to the differences we cover below.
2FA vs MFA: 9 Differences Worth Knowing
MFA Can Use More Authentication Protocols
Two-factor authentication relies on just two ways to prove you're you - usually your password and a temporary code sent to your phone or generated by an app. While this could seem a lot more simple, it's limiting in both terms of security and accessibility.
Having only two checks in 2FA means there are gaps for companies that need tougher protection.
No matter what site or app you're using, two-factor authentication might not be enough to stop things like you giving up your password through a scam or a hacker somehow getting hold of it.
MFA, on the other hand, uses many ways to make sure it’s really you. This might include things like scanning your fingerprint (biometrics) or using a special security gadget like an access card or something similar.
This flexibility doesn't only mean stronger protection. It also means companies can use tech frameworks like FIDO2 to improve their MFA. This can add to both how adaptable it is and how secure it keeps things.
MFA Can Have More Layers of Security
2FA is definitely safer than just using a password, but it's still got some areas that can be exploited by the wrong people. For instance, hackers might be able to trick your phone company into giving them your number. Or, even worse they might even fool you into giving up your codes through a fake website.
Sound farfetched? Well, 2FA usually just relies on your password and a code sent to your phone or one generated by an app. This means it's a lot more likely than you’d originally think.
For businesses, this limited security means your authentication systems are open to newer threats.
MFA on the other hand, adds an extra level of security by using multiple layers of checks. These are typically things that are harder to intercept or replicate like scanning your face or using a special security key.
2FA is Not as Flexible as MFA
2FA doesn't give you much wiggle room in how you set it up. Most 2FA systems stick to using your password and a one-time code. And it does this without much room to customize or connect with other security systems.
For companies, this lack of flexibility can be a real headache to deal with later on when scaling or when facing complex security needs. This is why, unfortunately, 2FA might not be the best option when dealing with different risk levels, devices, or work environments.
How so? Well, it basically uses a one-size-fits-all approach to security, which isn't ideal for organizations with complex roles and sensitive data.
MFA, however, gives organizations more options. Administration can choose their combination of security checks like fingerprint scans or special security keys.
Additionally, solutions like FIDO2 make it easy to integrate MFA smoothly, improving how well it can adapt to different scenarios and boosting overall security.
2FA is Riskier Than MFA
Another point worth mentioning is that 2FA lacks built-in risk-based authentication, as it uses the same two factors for all login attempts. This is regardless of user behavior or the context behind what information, tools, or access is being limited on what basis.
This narrow way of doing things limits your security system's response to different threats or suspicious activities.
For companies, these limits can lead to weak security. While not apparent, some of these could even be users accessing sensitive systems from untrusted locations.
MFA, however, supports risk-based authentication, allowing flexibility based on user behavior, location, or device. For this, IAM software like Infisign can help companies have adaptive multi-factor authentication and respond to risks in real-time.
MFA has Biometrics, 2FA Does Not
2FA typically does not use biometric authentication, it makes use of passwords and secondary codes like SMS or app-based tokens. This means a lower level of security as biometrics are harder to mimic or guess when you compare them to simple tokens or passwords.
While not obvious, for some, this can be an issue when trying to secure sensitive systems or user data. Why? well, traditional 2FA methods may not provide enough security against the newer threats we face as tech evolves.
MFA, however, can have biometrics like a fingerprint or facial recognition, making accessibility a lot safer. On the whole, companies that use biometric authentication frameworks enhance both access control and protect against password theft.
Customization When Integrated with an SSO Framework
2FA offers limited granularity when integrated with Single Sign-On (SSO) frameworks, as it typically applies the same two-factor method for all access points, regardless of the specific application or risk level involved.
For companies, this can be a challenge when managing complex environments with varying access control needs, as the lack of flexibility can lead to over- or under-secured systems.
MFA allows for greater granularity, enabling businesses to tailor authentication levels based on the application or user role. Frameworks like Infisign enable dynamic control, ensuring security without sacrificing user experience in an SSO environment.
MFA Has a Better Overall User Experience
2FA does not have the best user experience. A lot of the time, it needs a second authentication step, like a code from an SMS or an app. This extra step, while simple can be annoying for users that need quick access across multiple devices and platforms.
This generally leads to reduced user satisfaction or less willingness, impacting productivity.
While MFA adds more security layers, it can also minimize disruption through ways like biometric authentication or push notifications. With MFA, these alternative routes streamline authentication, improving the user experience without compromising on security.
MFA Can Make Use of Hardware Tokens
2FA often relies on simple stuff like codes sent by text or generated by apps. While better than nothing, these can still stolen by a scam on the internet. This type of authentication is right on the whole, but might not be the best solution for highly sensitive information.
In general, leaning too hard on these basic types tokens or authentiction can be risky. Why? well, scammers can always find ways to steal or intercept them. This goes especially if they can get their hands on the physical device.
MFA on the other hand, uses more elaborate hardware tokens, like FIDO2 keys or smart cards. While simple, these are much tougher to hack or copy.
2FA Has Less Phishing Resistance
2FA, especially when using texted codes or app-generated ones, is still at risk of phishing. Scammers can fool employees into giving up codes, going past the whole security setup.
Sound concerning? Well, it is! Especially when dealing with sensitive data or high-stakes transactions. Phishing is still one of the most common ways bad guys steal login info.
That’s said, MFA is better at fighting off phishing attempts than 2FA in these cases. With methods like hardware tokens or biometrics, these measures are typically hard to fake or steal. Additionally, tech like FIDO2 makes it super tough for scammers to trick you, even if they try their best social engineering tricks.
2FA vs MFA: Which is Better?
MFA generally comes out on top. It uses more ways to check who you are and can adapt to different situations. By using smart authentication and biometrics, organizations can seriously boost their security game, protecting against all sorts of evolving threats.
While for some 2FA is good enough, in the long run, it's pretty limited and doesn't offer much room for customization. That's why we'd strongly suggest MFA for companies that are looking to grow.
Curious about trying out MFA to improve your security? Why not reach out to the team at Infisign for a free trial?
