Authy App needs to be supported in Brave Browser


Recently I was sent a video of a person critiquing Brave Browser and the BAT project on youtube. There a lot of points they made that could be considered minor or subjective. However one point they made that I considered to be a valid issue was the Authy App. At this current point in time if someone wants to access their uphold account they must enable 2FA which requires the use of the Authy App. Now there is nothing wrong with this procedure and in fact it’s a pretty good thing under normal circumstances as it adds an additional layer of security. However the problem that comes into play is the lack of support for the Authy App in Brave Browser. Basically if someone were looking to switch to Brave and they happened to be a publisher with Brave then they would still have to use another browser in order to access their uphold account. Why? Because at this current point in time Brave Browser does not support the Authy App natively. So with that being said I think that’s something that definitely needs to change.

 People should be able to use the Authy App from Brave Browser in the same way they are able to use Meta Mask. Without being able to use the Authy App from Brave Browser we as publishers are still stuck using Chrome or other browsers that support Authy App to access our accounts. Authy App is also supported by other sites as well so this makes it even more difficult to completely switch to Brave when a lot of important sites rely on the application just to use the site including the site that helps to fund the Brave Browser Wallets and Publisher's accounts itself which is Uphold.


Basically if someone were looking to switch to Brave and they happened to be a publisher with Brave then they would still have to use another browser in order to access their uphold account. Why?

It’s worth pointing out that the Authy App is available on Android and iOS, just like Google Authenticator. In the video you’re referring to, the reviewer says they use Google Authenticator on their phone for 2FA. Yet, when it came time to use Authy (which is another popular 2FA app, identical to Google Authenticator), they for some reason went searching for a browser extension instead of the usual mobile app. Why did they not use the Authy 2FA app like they normally do Google Authenticator?

The implicature, which you keenly picked up on, is that there is a fundamental irony at play: that allegedly, “publishers can’t access their own publisher accounts through Brave because Authy is only available as an extension, and Brave currently does not support that extension.” This, of course, is a slightly unfair suggestion, since most users (including the reviewer) use 2FA via their mobile phones. Indeed, I presume this is how the vast majority of verified publishers access their dashboards now, including me!

Team’s Official Response

The team issued an official response to the video, which you can find here. It contains a section about Authy and 2FA as well: official response.

There will be improvements to Uphold in the near future, and it is reasonable to expect Google Authenticator support as well. Many websites offer the option of either GA or Authy.

Browser Extension Support in General

Regardless, we will likely see Authy extension support in Brave in the near future. And at the very least, we will see it in Brave v1.0, which will bring full Chrome extension coverage to Brave as a matter of course. For more info, see my comment in this thread: Hubspot Sales Extension :slight_smile:


Most users is not all users and that’s something to keep in mind. We don’t want to leave valuable users behind due to something not being available that’s available on other platforms. With that being said I can only speak for myself, and personally I have NEVER logged into Uphold nor used the Authy App via a mobile device. In fact for me that would be very inconvenient. While it’s true that 2FA generally requires a mobile phone number to authenticate an account keep in mind that not all phones are smart phones. Also keep in mind that not all phones run on Android or IOS. With that being said I personally tend stay away from doing things on my phone that are Cryptocurrency related mostly for security reasons. Phones in my opinion are a lot more susceptible to being manipulated versus a PC. Beyond that again it would be very inconvenient for me to do things via the mobile platform.

In any event what you said kind of over looks this issue. If we just assume that most people use a mobile device to do everything on which may be true, then we would also have to assume that most people have no use for the Brave Browser since it’s not available on mobile devices as of yet. So I don’t fully agree with your stance on this issue because It doesn’t encourage people to want to use the Brave Browser which is something that we want to happen. In fact the point of me presenting this was that it is a valid point. It’s not a valid point because it can be worked around (we obviously know that it’s not Impossible to use the Authy App), it’s valid because it shows a flaw that exist within using Brave Browser which is “why use Brave Browser if you can do the same things on another browser”. This is something we want to address because we want people to eventually not have to go to other browsers for anything, because for all that they can just use those separate browsers and never touch Brave. So it’s a reliability issue as well as a convenience issue that I think should legitimately be taken care of as soon as possible. No reason why it shouldn’t.

So in short lets not make excuses, lets make solutions. Lets not sweep this under the rug and instead resolve this issue so that it’s no longer a reason for someone not to use Brave or further more have to use another browser. Especially for something that literally applies to the brave program.


If I am not mistaken, Google Authenticator is not even available as a Chrome extension! :stuck_out_tongue: There are, to be sure, unofficial Google Authenticator extensions, but the official Google Authenticator is only for mobile. This is because 2FA is typically designed for use with a mobile device. Bearing this in mind, perhaps Authy being available as a browser extension should be viewed as a bonus or supererogatory, rather than taken to be the norm.

If we just assume that most people use a mobile device to do everything on which may be true, then we would also have to assume that most people have no use for the Brave Browser since it’s not available on mobile devices as of yet.

  1. It is very normal to use your mobile device as your 2FA authenticator while you use your browser on a laptop or desktop.

  2. I hope I am not misunderstanding what you mean in the second part of your sentence, but Brave is in fact available on mobile. Brave is available on iOS and Android. Yesterday, it reached 5 million downloads on the Android store. In fact, approximately 75% of Brave’s current 2.3 million users are on mobile!

At any rate, I don’t think anyone is trying to make excuses; software development is an iterative and ongoing process, and the team has stated that they are committed to improving user experience as part of this process based on testing and valuable feedback such as yours. We will see more and more extension support as time goes on, especially with v1.0 coming. Brave and BAT are still young projects, but are making great strides everyday.


Again I can only speak for myself, and I have personally never used Google Authenticator. So I can’t speak on it. I can only speak on the Authy App as this is what this topic is about. As far as looking at Authy App being added as a “Bonus” I think that’s a very distorted perspective to have. The reason being as I stated in my previous post we’re are attempting to encourage more users to use Brave Browser. So why in turn would a user use Brave Browser if it has less options than their previous browser and in order to get these same options that should be fundamental we have to look at them as “bonuses”. I think having that perspective is not progressive. While I can understand other applications being looked at as “perks” or complimentary, I simply refuse to do the same for an app that is vital in accessing an exchange which in turn is apart or affiliated with receiving your commission as a publisher if you use Brave. If anything I look at this from the perspective of the Authy App not being added to Brave is a great “over sight” rather than seeing it as a “desired” option. Especially considering it’s importance and relevance to the program. Otherwise I would just consider it miscellaneous. It really should be standard if anything in the same way Meta Mask is.

I was unaware that brave was officially added to mobile devices. Does this mean that if I send my affiliate link to someone and they’re on a mobile device that it will download the mobile version of my affiliate link? If not then I think that should be looked into (but that’s another topic).


Yes indeed! If you send your referral link to someone on mobile, it will send them to their appropriate app store.

closed #8

This topic was automatically closed 60 days after the last reply. New replies are no longer allowed.