Long story short about how I naively and foolishly set up 2FA using that account’s GVoice number for verifications and also knew nothing about needing to save GAuthenticator tokens externally, and later on, that device went permanently MIA:
With correct passwords and confirmation of the 2FA phone number (but no access to that 2FA phone), without any lockout imposed, and even though the 2FA account recovery security AI is devastatingly limited in its verification options, I verify the correct contact number and it forwards the SMS over, but I can’t access the text until I use the back email — I can and therefore should be able to verify with other legitimate means one-on-one with live homeland (Palo Alto) personnel who understand the injustice of it and are willing to manually assist in the recovery process, even if perhaps off the radar.
The third-party overseas Google One paid subscription-based tech “support” personnel I’ve thoroughly exhausted are entirely unequipped to correct anything, they’re totally incompetent, apathetic, and dismissive very slyly, barely within the parameters of their employee tech “support” scripted responses (pretty much the same shady behavior as most cellular company’s overseas tech “support”).
They aren’t real tech support, nor even Google employees, and have no backend access like Google’s unavailable homeland security team does. They even lie about scheduling a follow-up with a supervisor because there is no hierarchy of managerial phone support personnel.
The important details are that they work for a third-party subcontractor that imposes a different employee policy in a country far from Palo Alto, California.
The whole organization is a skeleton in a closet.There’s just nothing there for customer support.
Paid subscriptions to One are worse than worthless because those Filipinos can’t afford to be moral in that role in that country.
I know this is possible because articles have been published, specifically by Ron Miller at Tech Crunch (see link below) stating privileged connection for members of the media who use their publicity to leverage justice — which has been evident for him in the form of relayed access to informal backend tech support personnel — through someone who knows someone at Google.
https://techcrunch.com/2017/12/22/that-time-i-got-locked-out-of-my-google-account-for-a-month/
“On December 5th, I sent a note to a PR contact who I work with on Google-related news and I told him about my problem. He said he had gotten my case escalated and I should hear within 24 hours.”
“The Reset command never came.”
“On December 18th I contacted the poor beleaguered PR contact yet again and he wrote back. They wanted me to go through the process again except using my TechCrunch email instead of my other alternative. I pushed back that I already had an open case, but he suggested I do it and see it what happens.”
“Reunited and it feels so good I started the process entered my Techcrunch email and was simply asked to enter a new password and I was back in. After all that, that was all it took. I was ecstatic to have my digital life back, but I’m still shocked at a) how easy it was to lose access and b) how little recourse there was to get it back.”
So this is possible, and given the multitudes of dissatisfied Google employees and ex-Google employees, especially in this dawn of the degoogled Fediverse, I envision real possibilities.
TL/DR
So I’m here to request connection with anyone and everyone who can connect me to some real backend support before my account becomes scrubbed from the server.
=============
Verification I can provide:
• Access to the GVoice number with its voicemail password. With that, it should be made possible to confirm an audio verification code sent as a voice message instead of the default SMS I cannot access — if an audio verification message could be generated by Google support personnel. Good idea really.
• Password histories
• Temporary security Codes which the recovery process was supposed to prompt but did not
• Email addresses of incoming and outgoing emails
° Screenshots of Drive filesystem and filenames
• Screenshot of IP address of connected Chromebook
• Chromebook browser bookmarks
==============
Recordings and Documentation onhand:
• Emails and chats with Drive personnel
• Emails and chats with Google One’s Philippines subcontractor which includes attachments proving the Chromebook that was connected to the account is still in my possession connected to an alternative Google account, and those emails include screenshots of the IP address of the Chromebook with the Google Play Services Security Codes, which collectively prove my ownership of the limbo account. They ignored it.
The emails also include attachments of my photo ID. Bad idea, but I’d probably be fortunate if they abused that or jeopardized it anyway.
• Phone conversations with dozens of fully incompetent subcontracted, third-party Google One personnel based exclusively in the Philippines The recorded calls exhibit their discriminatory call center tactics and complete lack of any corrective resources are all whatsoever (not an embellishment).
=================
I want to know exactly who will present real password reset options because this is extremely important. I can’t contact twenty years of contacts anymore or ever again until Google just grants a password reset to me.
Have you tried just getting a new phone with the same number as your previous 2FA device?
You didn’t read the details or you’re misunderstanding something. The only phone number relevant in this issue is the GVoice number. GVoice doesn’t function according to the terms you just suggested.
I understand how Google Voice works. I was using it from the moment that Google acquired Grand Central.
What I understand about your problem:
If I am misunderstanding your situation, that is because you haven’t explained it clearly.
I am suggesting that you just get a new mobile phone with number B. Your Google Voice routing rules will continue to work.
Actually, we just think in different structures. That theory is not reality. The GVoice number sends to the device logged into that Google account, not the phone number. The 2FA requires verification by the GVoice number, not the private cellular line.
I encourage you to attempt that statement all over India throughout the multitudes of language variances there. Perhaps you’d take it back. Clearly is a universally controversial definition throughout the world of ambitious communicators. Who are you to judge my intricacies based on your foreign outlooks. I’m not you. I speak my language, not yours. Your comprehension is your achievement, not my achievement. I explained it clearly enough for those with accurate solution to recognize this as viable application of their ability to provide solution. The people with the experience and competence to mastermind solutions clearly recognize the indicators of the experiences they have already identified in concept form and masterminded through to solution. If you don’t understand my experience, then you wouldn’t have the solution, even if I brought you into enlightenment by further insight.
I need conversations with Google security personnel or investigative members of the media.
Anyone lower in chain of command operates mindlessly and apathetically according to orders. I swear the only people that think autonomously work at the top of a company or its departments, or else fiercely independently.
So you are using Voice without a real phone number to back it up?
You are supposed to have a backing phone number linked to your Voice number. This is an anti-fraud measure to prevent bad actors from gaining virtual numbers. Google Voice is not at all designed for that use case.
https://support.google.com/voice/thread/1390905/can-i-use-the-mobile-google-voice-app-without-a-linked-cell-phone-number?hl=en
Presumably you used a real phone number to do the initial setup, then removed the routing rule and intended to use the phone number purely through the web UI and/or app.
So you created a chicken-and-egg situation for yourself. You need to be logged in to access the 2FA code to login.
Unfortunately, you will not be able to resolve this outside of official channels. (Note that the PR department used by tech reporters counts as an official channel, just not one that you have access to.)
If it’s not possible to create a GVoice account other than by it’s design, then obviously it’s in good standing according to its design — and not in any way which is “not at all designed”. It’s a perfectly functional account created however it’s designed to allow.
I can’t see those settings right now without access to that account, and the terms you’re using are not visible in the app, not by those those terms anyway. I fine tune by experiment, so if it’s possible, then maybe, but GVoice is not a highly customizable app, certainly not to any extreme extents.
First, I’m genuinely curious to understand if this is entirely relevant as a potential factor in the experience of the 2FA issue.
And could you please rephrase this according to the terms in the section of the app settings that would allow this?