• BrianTheeBiscuiteer@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    1
    ·
    1 month ago

    The biggest problem I see is that it requires OS or browser integration. While possibly a better solution than simple passwords this feels like a vendor lock-in scheme.

    • Auli@lemmy.ca
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      0
      arrow-down
      1
      ·
      1 month ago

      You don’t remember them you are not expected to moving from iOS to Android lets say generate new ones for your new device.

  • BruisedMoose@piefed.social
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    1
    ·
    1 month ago

    Or “Like all questions of security vs convenience, a user should decide what they are or are not comfortable with.”

  • NoLemurs@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    0
    ·
    1 month ago

    They really aren’t a trap. They’re a well designed standard. The tooling around them isn’t quite perfect yet, but they’re a huge improvement over passwords.

    People upvote because they hate change.

    • ell1e@leminal.space
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      1
      ·
      edit-2
      1 month ago

      People upvote because they hate change.

      People upvote because big tech has a tendency of forcing the most anti ownership outcome possible on everyone. Here, such an outcome likely would be mandatory passkeys that are set up to require hardware attestation.

      One way to reduce that risk is to boycott passkeys until TPM and hardware attestation are removed from the standard. You may not think that’s a fair response, or that such a boycott won’t save us from the inevitable outcome, but nevertheless it’s not a completely irrational reaction.

  • DonutsRMeh@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    0
    ·
    1 month ago

    Passkeys are greate as long you make sure you use a third party (partial) password app, like proton or bitwarden that works everywhere.

    • IanTwenty@piefed.social
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      1
      ·
      edit-2
      1 month ago

      I think the worry is that if passkey attestation is required it will force people into a narrow set of authenticators controlled by the big orgs.

      At this point in time it’s not a problem, but how can we know it won’t be in future?

  • davel [he/him]@lemmy.ml
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    0
    ·
    edit-2
    1 month ago

    Admittedly I didn’t read that one guy’s blog post very closely, but it seemed to claim that because some companies may some day misuse/abuse some features of passkeys, passkeys are poison and no one should ever use them.

    • wewbull@feddit.uk
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      0
      ·
      1 month ago

      Well if that’s possible, it doesn’t sound like a good basis for security.

    • blackbrook@lemmy.ml
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      0
      ·
      1 month ago

      It’s a very basic principle, that you don’t create powers that could be abused. That they haven’t been abused yet does not make doing so ok. It like saying it’s ok that my government was given the power to lock people up with no reason or due process because they haven’t used it yet.

    • lemdeggity@lemmy.dbzer0.com
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      0
      ·
      1 month ago

      It’s essentially just public key cryptography streamlined to reduce friction for the user. When you’re prompted to create a passkey for a service a new public/private keypair is created. The private key can then be synced to other devices for example via the iCloud keychain or Bitwarden. Obviously you have to then trust that provider to keep your keys safe. The upside is that your passkey can be automatically discovered and used to sign in without using a password. Alternatively the private key can be device bound but the downside is that if you lose the device you lose the private key too.

      • ell1e@leminal.space
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        1
        ·
        edit-2
        1 month ago

        If it was just to helpfully reduce friction, it wouldn’t be so controversial. The inclusion of any sort of TPM and hardware attestation support at all is what has some people sounding the alarm (in my opinion rightfully).

        • Ooops@feddit.org
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          1
          ·
          edit-2
          1 month ago

          It’s mainly controversial because the actual use contradicts its purpose. Passkeys are phishing-resistent, which is still the main risk for password in real world scenarios, and are a good idea.

          But the websites supporting it put out big warnings when you don’t have another method to login configured. And they don’t actually advise you how to backup your passkey and keep it safe, but instead want you to set up an alternative way to login or recover your account. Which totally defeats the purpose in the first place.

          Quite the contrary: “there is a problem with your passkey/account, please use the recovery method you set up” even makes for more convincing phishing. So why are they pushing for passkeys when it isn’t for security reasons?

          • lastweakness@lemmy.world
            link
            fedilink
            arrow-up
            1
            ·
            1 month ago

            This is, imo, the bigger issue. No clean way to export and move passkeys around, even between the open source options like Bitwarden and Proton Pass or as plain backups…