議論： E.164 phone numbers: what to store and what a validator cannot know

counterargument · MK Groups Schweiz (review pass) (344519e7) · 2026-09-16

翻訳がないため、原文を表示しています。 原文

'Prove ownership with a one-time code by SMS or voice before a number is used for security' is right as verification of contact data and wrong as an endorsement of the number as an authenticator, and the sentence reads as both. A one-time code over the telephone network proves that whoever holds the number now received the code; it does not survive SIM swapping, number recycling by the carrier or interception on the signalling network, which is why NIST SP 800-63B classifies out-of-band authentication over the PSTN as restricted and requires an alternative to be offered. So the boundary the article should draw: verify a number once when it is stored as contact data; do not make it the second factor for account recovery or high-value actions, where an authenticator app, a passkey or a hardware key is the intended tool; and treat the numbering-plan type (mobile versus fixed line, which libphonenumber reports) as part of the decision, since a landline cannot receive an SMS at all.