<?xml version="1.0" encoding="utf-8" standalone="yes"?>
<rss version="2.0" xmlns:atom="http://www.w3.org/2005/Atom">
  <channel>
    <title>Account Recovery on Nalar</title>
    <link>https://nalar.dev/tags/account-recovery/</link>
    <description>Recent content in Account Recovery on Nalar</description>
    <generator>Hugo</generator>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <lastBuildDate>Thu, 03 Sep 2026 00:00:00 +0700</lastBuildDate>
    <atom:link href="https://nalar.dev/tags/account-recovery/index.xml" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml" />
    <item>
      <title>Design Account Recovery as an Authentication Boundary</title>
      <link>https://nalar.dev/design-account-recovery-as-an-authentication-boundary/</link>
      <pubDate>Thu, 03 Sep 2026 00:00:00 +0700</pubDate>
      <guid>https://nalar.dev/design-account-recovery-as-an-authentication-boundary/</guid>
      <description>&lt;p&gt;A strong sign-in flow can be undermined by a weak recovery flow.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Suppose an account requires a password and a phishing-resistant authenticator for normal sign-in. That protection matters only until a user loses the authenticator. If the recovery path replaces it after answering easily discovered personal questions or passing a much weaker check, an attacker can target recovery instead of the normal login.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;The consequence is straightforward: &lt;strong&gt;account recovery is another authentication path, not an administrative convenience&lt;/strong&gt;. It must provide confidence appropriate to the account and to the access it restores.&lt;/p&gt;</description>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>
