New Online Security
Reading Time: 2 MinutesLast Updated: November 3, 2023
We’ve added an extra layer of security for our customers when they interact with us online. Now, my Social Security account holders are required to use their cell phone — in addition to their username and password — as another authentication factor during online registration and every sign in. An authentication factor is information used to determine if someone is who they claim to be.
This extra layer of security is called “multifactor authentication” and complies with an executive order requiring federal agencies to provide more secure authentication for their online services. Any agency that provides online access to a customer’s personal information must now use multifactor authentication.
Since my Social Security became available in May 2012, almost 26 million people have created an account. We have always offered multifactor authentication, but only for customers who opted for extra security. For your protection, we now require multifactor authentication for all my Social Security users. To register and sign in, you must now enter a security code that we will send to your cell phone. Your cell phone provider’s text message and data rates may apply.
Our research shows that an overwhelming majority of American adults have cell phones and use them for texting. Because of technical and resource constraints, we are not currently able to offer alternative methods of satisfying this security requirement. However, we may consider adding more options in the future. We appreciate your patience as we work continuously to secure your online information.
We’re committed to using the best technologies and standards available to protect our customers’ data. Multifactor authentication is just one of the ways we’re ensuring the safety and security of the resources entrusted to us. Visit my Social Security to learn more about this helpful suite of online services, including additional details about our latest security measures.
Did you find this Information helpful?
Tags: my Social Security, my Social Security account
See CommentsAbout the Author
Jim Borland, Assistant Deputy Commissioner, Communications
Jim Borland, Assistant Deputy Commissioner, Communications
Comments
Comments are closed.
DBGraniteville
“DITTO” for everyone that has stated “who did think this through” Again, how can the govt “require” you required to have a cell to receive your “OWN” information – Giving your cell# to the govt – you might as well put it on the 6:00 news telemarketers are sitting in wait for these list
tammy
No matter how hard you try to make the SOCIALIST SECURITY SYSTEM more secure, the FRAUD comes from within. The FRAUD is written into the rules, like being physically disabled, marrying an “able bodied person” and loosing out on a lifetime of benefits, all because you married an “able bodied person”.
Because you are physically disabled (adult disabled child) and you choose not to marry another adult disabled child or disabled person drawing off socialist security, you WILL LOOSE ANY AND ALL BENEFITS FOR LIFE. This means that the SOCIALIST SECURITY system is TELLING YOU WHO YOU ARE ALLOWED TO MARRY and who you are
NOT ALLOWED TO MARRY! It is a discriminatory act “rule” and should be ILLEGAL!
Even though I am permanently and totally disabled, if I marry an “able bodied person”, somehow that marriage makes everything ok and I am no longer considered disabled (in the eyes of the socialist security system). Magically (because I married an able bodied person), the pixie fairies come down and cure my disability, because now I can just go out and find gainful employment, no one will discriminate against my physical disability and everything will be grand, right? Somehow magically, marrying an able bodied person makes my physical disablility dissappear and now I am cured, right? WRONG!
The issue is a special “Rule” that the Socialist Security System uses to discriminate against “certain” people. If you are a “physically disabled person” (AKA-certain people) and happen to marry an able bodied person, then the SOCIALIST SECURITY system will use special “Rules” to legally discriminate against you and deny you benefits, even if you appeal online.
The SOCIALIST SECURITY system has caused me a lot of economic hardship all because I married an able bodied person. The SOCIALIST SECURITY system thinks someone who is physically disabled (permanently and totally disabled) marries an “able bodied person”, that somehow magically they are cured of their physical disability and two people can survive off the able bodied persons income. WOW, talk about a bunch of bureaucratic idiotic thinking, that somehow this would not cause a financial hardship….. amazing.
The rules that the Social Security Administration uses to legally discriminate against persons who are “Adult Disabled Children” who happen to marry an able bodied person, are discriminatory. This is loosely referred to as the “marriage penalty” but I call it exactly what it is, a legal form of discrimination.
I firmly believe this rule, is an act of bias, prejudice and discrimination against people who (by no fault of their own) are born disabled and happen to marry an able bodied person
Please write your Congressional Representative and tell them to end this modern day form of Legal Discrimination. In this day of fairness and equality, there are still some people suffering from an outdated and oppressive bureaucratic rule.
(PS. notice how the only thing any of these SOCIALIST SECURITY workers ever say are quotes of the rules or processes, like a worker drone. They are unable to address any topics that fall outside of their rule books). Typical bureaucracy and bureaucratic responses, like trying to argue over lost change with a vending machine!
Raul t.
Phone companies have found another way to force you to get cell phone like it or no, by simply teaming up with SSA, has nothing to do with security..
Raul
Phone companies have found another way to force you to get cell phones like or not, by simply teaming up with SSA…Has nothing to do with security..
Luann R.
Unbelievable! As American citizens living abroad, we can’t access our accounts because our cellphone numbers are more than 10 digits long. When I complained via e-mail, I received a form letter saying I should contact my state representative or senator (!), because SSA did not “mandate” the change. What bull! The SSA’s own Organizational Manual clearly states that the SSA is responsible for handling all online systems. Typical bureaucratic buck-passing. How difficult would it have been to create a field that accepts more than 10 digits? Or a country code? Not difficult at all! And of course, any citizen without a cellphone should have another way to authenticate.
Frank
I have a 10-digit phone number within the numbering plan that’s shared between the US and other North American countries, but still can’t have an account because my mailing address is not in the USA. Were you ever able to access your accounts if you didn’t have US mailing address. How did that work?
Juan S.
The saddest part of this situation is the utterly disregard and lack of consideration for “The other”, as the elderly who is not techno-pro efficient, the poor who can not afford the cost, the disable who can’t handle one more hurdle, in the end all the people that they are suppose to serve, but they chose to hurt instead.
Mark P.
“If you do not have a text-enabled cell phone or you do not wish to provide your cell phone number, you will not be able to access your my Social Security account.”
The best example of wholly unacceptable (government) service.
Hello Social Security, how about approaching the Executive Order like this:
We must improve security, we offer you 3 choices. 1) two-part authentication via your cell phone (if you have one that accepts text) or 2) We will call your home landline phone and provide your passcode or 3) we can mail it to your address on file, note takes longer.
Every financial institution I have a relationship gives you OPTIONS but SSA, you just slammed the door closed with very little notice and ZERO options.
Please provide us options BEFORE eliminating access!
I support improving security, but not in this fashion (forced) and it is really hard to understand how a group of adults proposed and supported rolling out this improvement utilizing this method.
Sad and someone needs to be held accountable.
Bonnie
This was a HORRIBLE idea. I very seldom use a cell phone and may not even have it with me when I need to log in. I think this should be OPTIONAL – let the people who are that concerned use this method and leave the rest of us alone.
Also, TOO MANY PEOPLE DO NOT HAVE CELL PHONES OR CAN TEXT, or it costs money to text. This is VERY BURDENSOME and is not necessary.
I can see that I will not be using this account very much and will be relying on the telephone WAY more often — prepare to hire lots of new staff for those like me.
Rene C.
I don’t need to add to the previous comments that have highlighted how exclusionary this policy it. But in regard to their offer that there are other means available for contacting the agency, lets think this through. Why were on-line services provided and encouraged to begin with. I would assume to reduce costs and reduce the staff workload among others. So instead they are going to force more people to use emails which must (one would hope) get replied, make phone calls (and suffer what are already long wait times) and request office appointments. In turn the government will become less efficient, more costly and those individuals they are suppose to serve will get worse service because they can’t or won’t pay for what they are entitled to.
Michael S.
“Our research shows that an overwhelming majority of American adults have cell phones and use them for texting”. Yes, but not among people to whom accessing their SS accounts is of most interest.
According to ThePew Research Center, only 27% of people 65 and up have smartphones. Just 54% of those age 50 to 64 do. So you are subjecting that portion of the population to access requirements who are least likely to be able to accommodate them, but to whom that access is probably more important than to any other age group. Government smarts at work Well done.
Omar A.
Did SSA conduct their “research” by sending survey questions as text-messages to SS account holders?
That methodology would certainly explain the biased finding of “overwhelming majority of … have cell phones”, just as a survey conducted using a Web site only covers respondents with Web access!