Yeah, you probably shouldn't have two providers with the same name.

However, if we enforce UNIQUE on the column, you can't use the default/empty name for two providers at the same time. The field is optional and providers get sensible (and i18n-able) names if you leave it blank, and it seems reasonable to have a default-named SMS provider and a default-named TOTP provider at the same time.

I guess we could put a unique key on both columns (<providerFactorKey, name>), but maybe having a default-named, disabled provider and a different, default-named, active provider of the same type is okay?

This mostly just seems like it's probably not something we really need to enforce technically unless this UI proves way more confusing than I expect it to be, even though cases where two providers have the same name are probably not ideal.