Comparison Hub

Learn how Glide Identity replaces SMS OTP, authenticator codes, WhatsApp OTPs, and Silent Verification with carrier-signed cryptographic authentication.

Authentication today balances security, cost, and user experience, but most legacy methods fail at least one of these. 
‍
One-time passwords, passkeys, and authenticator apps rely on shared secrets, user actions, or device trust, all of which introduce phishing and operational risk. 
‍
MagicalAuth® replaces these approaches with carrier-signed cryptographic authentication, delivering phishing-resistant security without friction.

How MagicAuth® Differs from OTP, Passkeys, and Authenticator Apps

A side-by-side overview of how MagicalAuth® compares to SMS, Passkeys, and Authenticator apps across the metrics that matter.

MagicAuth uses carrier-signed cryptographic proof, not shared secrets or user-entered codes.
Unlike SMS OTP and WhatsApp OTP, MagicAuth is phishing-resistant by design.
Unlike passkeys and authenticator apps, MagicAuth provides network-verified proof of possession.
MagicAuth eliminates OTP delivery, replay, interception, and social-engineering risks.
Authentication events are auditable, verifiable, and cryptographically bound.

How Modern Authentication Methods Really Compare

A side-by-side comparison of security, phishing resistance, privacy, and operational risk across today’s most common authentication approaches.

Category	MagicalAuth® + SuperPasskey®	SMS OTP	Silent Network Authentication (SNA)	OTT Apps (WhatsApp, Telegram, Viber, etc.)	Authenticator Apps (Microsoft Auth, etc.)
Core Cryptographic Property	Network-issued, short-lived signed tokens. Operator-verified and cryptographically anchored.	No cryptography – plain 6-digit codes sent via SMS, easily intercepted or spoofed.	Not cryptographic – uses header or IP-based inference; can be faked by proxies or VPNs.	Encrypted messages but not tied to the user’s SIM or verified identity.	Device-only cryptography – relies on stored secrets, not network verification.
Proof of Possession	Strong – verified directly by the operator; bound to both SIM and device.	Weak – can be intercepted or SIM-swapped.	Weak – inferred from network data, not cryptographically proven.	Weak – based on who owns the app, not who owns the number. Spoofable.	Medium – code sits on device; if phone is stolen, code still works.
Phishing Resistance	High – network-signed tokens can’t be reused or stolen.	Low – users can be tricked into sharing codes; codes can be replayed.	Low – spoofable via network routing or proxy manipulation.	Low – users can be socially engineered to approve fake requests.	Medium – user may mistakenly share or enter code on fake sites.
Privacy / PII Exposure	Private – pseudonymous verification, no phone number or PII shared.	High – exposes phone number in every transaction.	High – network often returns phone number or match results.	Medium – leaks metadata (e.g. contact linkages, last-seen info).	Low – works locally, but identity still linked to the device; not anonymous.
Coverage / Reach	Expanding with global carriers. Works over Wi-Fi and mobile networks seamlessly.	Global but unreliable – delayed delivery, blocked SMS, and interception risk.	Carrier-dependent; often fails when user is on Wi-Fi or roaming.	Limited – only works if user has the app installed and notifications enabled.	User-dependent – requires manual setup, app install, and code entry.
Latency / UX	Instant – sub-second verification, no user action required.	Slow – user waits for SMS, reads, types code.	Slow – depends on carrier routing and header response.	Slower – user must open the app and confirm or read a message.	Cumbersome – user opens app, finds code, and manually types it in.
Auditability / Legal Trace	High – cryptographically signed logs with operator timestamping and full traceability.	Low – no verifiable signature or legal-grade audit trail.	Low – heuristic or incomplete logs; lacks verifiable proof.	Medium – app-level logs only; no independent audit.	Medium – logs only stored on device or app server; not network verified.

MagicAuth vs OTP, Passkeys, and Authenticator Apps

We don't just compete with traditional MFA; we solve the problems they create. Compare the capabilities below.

MagicalAuth® vs. SMS OTP

See why SMS OTP is insecure and outdated. Learn how MagicalAuth® replaces codes with carrier-signed cryptographic proof for instant, phishing-resistant authentication.

MagicalAuth® vs. Header Enrichment

Header Enrichment isn’t cryptographic and fails on Wi-Fi. Discover how MagicalAuth® offers real SIM-bound proof, privacy protection, and cross-network reliability.

MagicalAuth® vs OTT Apps

WhatsApp and Telegram OTPs rely on messages, not identity. Compare them with MagicalAuth® carrier-signed authentication that removes codes and stops phishing.

MagicalAuth® vs. Authenticator Apps

Authenticator apps still rely on shared secrets and phishable codes. Learn how MagicalAuth® + SuperPasskey® remove codes entirely with network-verified cryptography.

Comparison Hub

Learn how Glide Identity replaces SMS OTP, authenticator codes, WhatsApp OTPs, and Silent Verification with carrier-signed cryptographic authentication.

How MagicAuth® Differs from OTP, Passkeys, and Authenticator Apps

How Modern Authentication Methods Really Compare

MagicAuth vs OTP, Passkeys, and Authenticator Apps

MagicalAuth® vs. SMS OTP

MagicalAuth® vs. Header Enrichment

MagicalAuth® vs OTT Apps

MagicalAuth® vs. Authenticator Apps

Security starts with the right foundation

Solutions

company

Resources

API Catalog