Passkeys are built on the FIDO2 standard (CTAP2 + WebAuthn standards). They remove the shared secret, stop phishing at the source, and make credential-stuffing useless.

But adoption is still low, and interoperability between Apple, Google, and Microsoft isn’t seamless.

I broke down how passkeys work, their strengths, and what’s still missing

  • NauticalNoodle@lemmy.ml
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    3
    arrow-down
    1
    ·
    edit-2
    2 hours ago

    if it undermines or circumvents my fifth amendment right not to testify against myself, then I’m not interested in ending the use of passwords.

    • needanke@feddit.org
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      1
      ·
      22 minutes ago

      You can set a pin on most passkey devices so that it doesn’t serve the authentication without it.

  • laranis@lemmy.zip
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    10
    arrow-down
    1
    ·
    3 hours ago

    Why do you have the 4-digit PIN? Well, it’s just to unlock the part of your device where the private key is stored.

    And there is the problem I have with passkeys. With a password it is me authenticating to the service I’m using. Pretty straight forward (if you ignore the operating system, web browser, network protocols, etc., but that’s part of using the tech).

    With passkeys you’ve got this third party storing your keys that increases your attack surface. It could be your web browser, your OS, or some cloud provider that you’re now relying on to keep your data safe. I get that for people whose password is “password123” or who aren’t savvy enough to avoid phishing maybe this helps. But with decent opsec this overly complicates authentication, IMO.

    To my point, later in the article:

    Securing your cloud account with strong 2FA and activating biometrics is crucial.

    What’s that now? The weak point is the user’s ability to implement MFA and biometrics? The same users who couldn’t be bothered to create different passwords for different sites? You see how we’ve just inserted another layer into the authentication process without solving for the major weakness?

    With my tinfoil hat on I suspect this push toward passkeys is just another corporate data and/or money grab – snake oil for companies to get their tentacles tighter around your digital existence.

    Happy to be proven wrong.

    • sentientRant@lemmy.worldOP
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      2
      ·
      21 minutes ago

      Today we use lots of accounts with unique passwords. Obviously these passwords have to be stored somewhere. So I disagree with you when you say it’s a unique passkey thing.

      Passkey has an advantage when it comes to phishing because it doesn’t totally rely on human intelligence or state of mind.

      From a personal experience my data was leaked online, not because of phishing or I was careless. but it was leaked from a well known third party site which I used. They were affected by a very serious breach. Many unlike me use the same passwords for their emails and stuffs. But in case of passkeys there isn’t a shared secret. A breach will be useless.

    • Evotech@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      9
      arrow-down
      1
      ·
      edit-2
      3 hours ago

      Passkeys can’t be phished.

      That’s the main point.

      Phishing is a reeeeal pain. And something that needs to be solved. Not through training but with technology.

  • Galactose@sopuli.xyz
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    2
    ·
    4 hours ago

    Yeah totally not going to be misused by corporations with proprietary cryptographic-algorithm

  • tym@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    4
    ·
    8 hours ago

    hot take: end users will be more likely to adopt security keys (or device attested passkey which = security key). Physical security, out-of-bounds cryptography to defeat AitM attacks (fake landing pages where six digit codes are stolen and silently used in perpetuity by the bad actor)

    source: my job is to try to get end users to put strong MFA on all the things.

    • Appoxo@lemmy.dbzer0.com
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      3
      ·
      6 hours ago

      Acrually not really.
      I do use it with my password manager.
      Very convenient.

      BUT, it’s not hardware based so more suscepticle to attacks.

  • Korhaka@sopuli.xyz
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    11
    arrow-down
    1
    ·
    10 hours ago

    I don’t want to boot up a fucking android VM to run some login app every time I need to log into an unimportant account that realistically I would have used “el-passwordo” for the password if it let me.

    • Jakeroxs@sh.itjust.works
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      1
      arrow-down
      1
      ·
      4 hours ago

      You can use browser extensions, not sure why you’d think you’d have to run an android VM lmfao

      • Korhaka@sopuli.xyz
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        2
        ·
        1 hour ago

        I just know the one my employer forces me to use can’t be. Need to use the stupid microsoft app.

        • Jakeroxs@sh.itjust.works
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          1
          ·
          1 hour ago

          Not sure if that’s actually a “passkey” in the same sense then, MS is doing its own shit for sure. I use vaultwarden/bitwarden and can save standard passkeys there no problem.

  • Kyden Fumofly@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    16
    arrow-down
    1
    ·
    13 hours ago

    Tried Passkey in the past. I had many problems, especially could not understand why they must use my google account. Now my google account is gone, don’t gonna go that rabbit hole again, i am happy with my Bitwarden and Aegis.

    • Appoxo@lemmy.dbzer0.com
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      3
      ·
      edit-2
      27 minutes ago

      Bitwarden does support access to access keys in (for example) firefox.
      I have not tested outside of browser (firefox). So it may depend on if you use chrome or some other app.

      Edit: Just got a suggestion inside the Amazon app (Android. Yes, I hate Amazon as well but I got a gift card and I hate it even more to give them a free of charge credit) to add a passkey. So it seems to work (semi-)reliable outside of a browser.

    • Dremor@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      3
      ·
      7 hours ago

      You can now use thirds parties APIs for Passkey. I use ProtonPass on my part, it works great most of the time, but there are still some apps that have Google provider hard-coded.

  • lucille@piefed.blahaj.zone
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    13
    arrow-down
    1
    ·
    14 hours ago

    It seems like the idea behind having the passkeys synced through cloud platforms is to mitigate the device failure risk as much as possible, as any device logged into the cloud account could be used to access the passkey protected accounts. It seems a little short-sighted as it means that the passkeys are limited to AAL2 (as AAL3 requires it to be non-exportable), and depends on the security of the cloud account. The cloud account can’t use anything as secure as a passkey, as it would reintroduce the device failure risk (meaning that your security has been downgraded from AAL3 to AAL2 for no reason).

    It should also be noted that if the cloud account is not phishing-resistant (which it can’t be for reasons stated above), then the accounts protected by passkeys aren’t phishing resistant either, as the cloud account could be phished, which would lead to a compromise of the other accounts.

    At AAL2 you could also just use a password and OTP, which doesn’t have the vendor lock-in problems with cloud synced passkeys and has a wider adoption already.

    In my opinion there is no need for cloud syncing, as device failure risk is negligible if you have a backup security key (as the failure rate of a single security key is already extremely low).

  • rekabis@lemmy.ca
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    22
    ·
    16 hours ago

    Just don’t take away passwords + TOTP 2FA for those of us who are actually using it correctly.

  • HulkSmashBurgers@reddthat.com
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    58
    arrow-down
    1
    ·
    23 hours ago

    The eco-system lock-in makes this a non-starter for me. If I could store the private keys in something like a keepass vault (or that) and do the authentication magic from that I would consider it.

    • sonofearth@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      3
      ·
      12 hours ago

      I am not dependent on any ecosystem for passkeys. I have a self-hosted vaultwarden instance that works with Bitwarden clients. I create and store my passkeys over there primarily and in my keepass db (which I primarily use for TOTPs) for redundancy. So if either one gets compromised, I can just delete the passkey for the accounts involved in that database.

    • cmhe@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      20
      arrow-down
      4
      ·
      edit-2
      22 hours ago

      You can? At least I do that. I host vaultwarden myself and store the passkeys there.

      Passkeys to me are just a better way to autofill in login data.

      • barryamelton@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        20
        ·
        22 hours ago

        OK, now think how nontechnical people will not be able to do it. They will be tied to Google/X-corp for all credentials, even government ones. Waiting to be banned if their social credit is too low.

        • Frezik@lemmy.blahaj.zone
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          17
          ·
          21 hours ago

          That’s the root of the problem. Nontechnical people don’t use good passwords, but all the ideas we have for replacing them are only usable by more technically minded people.

          There are a variety of other reasons why passwords are bad, though.

        • cmhe@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          1
          ·
          13 hours ago

          True. But I would say that this isn’t an issue intrinsic with passkey. Many people don’t have time/energy or the attitude to think critically about technology and are herded towards Google/X-corp/etc with offers of convenience and because they are often the only offered choice on the web sites. But from the POV of passkey they just act as a password manager.

        • Alaknár@sopuli.xyz
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          9
          arrow-down
          1
          ·
          21 hours ago

          OK, now think how nontechnical people will not be able to do it.

          Nontechnical people can use BitWarden/Keeper/Proton Authenticator/any other major system like that instead of self-hosting.

  • Brokkr@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    215
    arrow-down
    6
    ·
    1 day ago

    While the lock-in issue is annoying and a good reason not to adopt these, the device failure issue is a tech killer. Especially when I can use a password manager. This means I can remember two passwords (email and password manager), make them secure, and then always recover all my accounts.

    Passkeys are a technology that were surpassed 10 years before their introduction and I believe the only reason they are being pushed is because security people think they are cool and tech companies would be delighted to lock you into their system.

    • hansolo@lemmy.today
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      92
      arrow-down
      2
      ·
      1 day ago

      This is the only accurate take in the whole thread.

      Passkeys solve “well, can’t be fished” by introducing 2 new problems and never resolving super prevalent session hijacking. Even as a basic cost-benefit analysis, it’s a net loss to literally everyone.

      • anomnom@sh.itjust.works
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        2
        ·
        4 hours ago

        That’s what I worried, and then especially to computers that age out of updates (2 older MacBooks).

        We end up having to reauthenticate on some other device at some point anyway and that means there’s still going to be a weak point.

        Like with 2 auth sim jacking.

    • LuigiMaoFrance@lemmy.ml
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      36
      arrow-down
      3
      ·
      1 day ago

      Cops also love them because they make getting access to your entire phone including all accounts simple as cake if you use fingerprint/faceID to unlock your device.

    • ☂️-@lemmy.ml
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      15
      arrow-down
      2
      ·
      23 hours ago

      its being pushed because corporations want to control your passwords with lock-in.

      no way i’m using that garbage over my own manager with recallable plaintext passwords.

    • 4am@lemmy.zip
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      31
      arrow-down
      1
      ·
      1 day ago

      Password managers store passkeys. They’re portable and not device-locked. Been using them on Bitwarden for like 2 years now.

      • Brokkr@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        2
        ·
        5 hours ago

        It is not portable in the sense that you need bitwarden installed on the device you are trying to connect from.

        Passwords can be plain text, which means I can copy, paste, and dictate them to a device that does not have additional software installed.

    • smiletolerantly@awful.systems
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      39
      arrow-down
      5
      ·
      1 day ago

      You can store Passkeys in open source password managers.

      I don’t know most of my passwords, so the step to passkeys doesn’t feel like a big one. I also really like the flow of pressing Login; Bitwarden pops up a prompt without me initiating it; I press confirm. Done, logged in, and arguably more secure due to the surrounding phishing and shared secrets benefits.

      • Brokkr@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        31
        arrow-down
        2
        ·
        edit-2
        1 day ago

        Sure, they probably work great when you have your *passkey manager on the device, but that’s not when I need to have backup routes into my accounts. When using a new device, or someone else’s, having even a complicated password that can be typed or copied-pasted has way more functionality.

        As far a I can tell, using passkeys would only risk locking me out of my accounts. Everyone else is already effectively locked out.

      • JackbyDev@programming.dev
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        4
        ·
        1 day ago

        I was never prompted to do such a thing. It always just told me to plug in my phone (and even that didn’t work).

      • Septimaeus@infosec.pub
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        4
        arrow-down
        3
        ·
        22 hours ago

        Yeah the moods in this thread, like

        “[I don’t understand this]!”

        “[I don’t trust this]!”

        “[It doesn’t fix everything]!”

        “[This doesn’t benefit me]!”

        “[What’s wrong with old way]!?”

        And like, all valid feelings… just the reactions are a bit… intense? Especially considering it’s a beta stage auth option that amounts to a fancy version of the old sec key industry standard, not the mark of the beast.

        • Rooster326@programming.dev
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          6
          arrow-down
          1
          ·
          edit-2
          19 hours ago

          Because we all know it will eventually go from a “neat” to mandatory with vendor lock-in for no other reason than “fuck you”.

          We’ve all seen it a few hundred times now with X, and Y.

          I get a few daily pop-ups for “Want to use a pass key”. One from my bank. No I don’t want to link my fingerprint to my bank account especially in a way that will lock me out when I replace my phone.

          Remember folks: Biometrics (What you are) is not constitutionally protected but what you know is (for now at least).

          • jabberwock@lemmy.dbzer0.com
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            3
            ·
            6 hours ago

            This is a fundamental misunderstanding of how the FIDO2 standard works. It is not designed to be vendor specific and as other people in this thread point out, plenty of open-source secrets managers and hardware implement passkeys.

            What we’ve seen is the typical Silicon Valley model of “embrace, extend, extinguish” so you’re right to be wary of any implementation by Google or Microsoft.

            Same goes for biometrics - how you unlock the passkey isn’t specified in the standard. It is left up to the implementation. If you don’t want to use biometrics, you don’t have to.

          • Septimaeus@infosec.pub
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            2
            ·
            5 hours ago

            If we cut and run every time a big corporation “embraces” a new standard, just to lessen the pain of the day it’s inevitably “extinguished,“ we’d miss out on quite a lot.

            This standard was open from the start. It was ours. Big corps sprinted ahead with commercial development, as they do, but just because they’re first to implement doesn’t mean we throw in the towel.

            Also:

            1. Bio auth isn’t necessary. It’s just how Google/Apple do things on their phones. It’s not part of the FIDO2 standard.
            2. It works with arbitrary password managers including FLOSS and lots of hardware options.
            3. Passkeys can sync to arbitrary devices, browsers, device bound sessions, whatever.
          • smiletolerantly@awful.systems
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            3
            ·
            13 hours ago

            You do not need your fingerprint or any other biometric to use a passkey.

            You do not lose access to passkeys when you lose your device.

    • l_b_i@pawb.social
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      40
      arrow-down
      11
      ·
      1 day ago

      I think they are being pushed because cool technology on paper. Whenever I read an article about them, I can’t help but think about the human factors. How are passkeys created, often by a password or email. okay… that looks a lot like a password. Oh you lost the passkey, here lets send you one again. It stinks of a second factor without a first. Sure, the passkey itself is hard to compromise, but how about its creation. If your email is compromised I see no difference from passwords or passkeys.

      • 4am@lemmy.zip
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        13
        arrow-down
        1
        ·
        1 day ago

        They don’t email you a passkey, what are you even talking about?

        • l_b_i@pawb.social
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          6
          arrow-down
          9
          ·
          1 day ago

          The flow I hear about when people talk about passkeys is sign up with email. Code gets sent to email. Code is entered, passkey gets generated. There always seems to be some similar step that looks like that, and often you have new device or reset that looks the same. Sure the passkey itself is secure, but how do you get it, how do you generate it, how do you validate the first time?

          • Encrypt-Keeper@lemmy.world
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            13
            arrow-down
            2
            ·
            1 day ago

            None of that is remotely true lol. You don’t get a passkey, you generate. Nothing is “sent” to you at any point in time, it has nothing to do with email.

    • HubertManne@piefed.social
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      6
      arrow-down
      1
      ·
      1 day ago

      I came to sorta say this. Regardless of the system if it can fail and if people have to recover an account then phishing will always be a thing. In person options to deal with an account like with bank branches or government offices are the only true way of making things more secure. I sometimes think it would make sense for this. One rare thing I have seen that gives me a bit of hope is the use of in person at the post office for us government accounts. Thats exactly how it should be done. Secretary of state for state and usps for federal. They are the only agencies with enough physical locations.

    • jj4211@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      5
      arrow-down
      1
      ·
      1 day ago

      Passkeys are a technology that were surpassed 10 years before their introduction

      Question is by what? I could see an argument that it is an overcomplication of some ill-defined application of x509 certificates or ssh user keys, but roughly they all are comparable fundamental technologies.

      The biggest gripe to me is that they are too fussy about when they are allowed and how they are stored rather than leaving it up to the user. You want to use a passkey to a site that you manually trusted? Tough, not allowed. You want to use against an IP address, even if that IP address has a valid certificate? Tough, not allowed.

        • psycotica0@lemmy.ca
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          17
          arrow-down
          1
          ·
          edit-2
          1 day ago

          Technically they are the 2fa. The second factor is something you have. I store all my passkeys in my password manager too, so I’m not faulting you, but technically that’s just undoing the second factor, because now my two factors are “two things that are both unlocked by the same one thing I know”. Which is one complicated factor spread across two form fields.

        • jj4211@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          3
          arrow-down
          2
          ·
          1 day ago

          Password managers are a workaround, and broadly speaking the general system is still weak because password managers have relatively low adoption and plenty of people are walking around with poorly managed credentials. Also doesn’t do anything to mitigate a phishing attack, should the user get fooled they will leak a password they care about.

          2FA is broad, but I’m wagering you specifically mean TOTP, numbers that change based on a shared secret. Problems there are: -Transcribing the code is a pain -Password managers mitigate that, but the most commonly ‘default’ password managers (e.g. built into the browser) do nothing for them -Still susceptible to phishing, albeit on a shorter time scale

          Pub/priv key based tech is the right approach, but passkey does wrap it up with some obnoxious stuff.

          • Rooster326@programming.dev
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            1
            ·
            19 hours ago

            password managers have relatively low adoption and plenty of people are walking around with poorly managed credentials

            All of the modern browsers have built in password managers so I doubt that very much.

            Are they as secure as your self-hosted bit warden that is not accessible via the Internet? No.

            But it does still keep track of your usernames and even alerts you if you have a breach.

            • jj4211@lemmy.world
              link
              fedilink
              English
              arrow-up
              1
              ·
              8 hours ago

              Ok, I’ll concede that Chrome makes Google a relatively more popular password manager than I considered, and it tries to steer users toward generated passwords that are credible. Further by being browser integrated, it mitigates some phishing by declining to autofill with the DNS or TLS situation is inconsistent. However I definitely see people discard the suggestions and choose a word and think ‘leet-speak’ makes it hard (“I could never remember that, I need to pick something I remember”). Using it for passwords still means the weak point is human behavior (in selecting the password, in opting not to reuse the password, and in terms of divulging it to phishing attempt).

              If you ascribe to Google password manager being a good solution, it also handles passkeys. That removes the ‘human can divulge the fundamental secret that can be reused’ while taking full advantage of the password manager convenience.

          • xthexder@l.sw0.com
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            1
            ·
            20 hours ago

            Lack of adoption doesn’t really make password managers a workaround. What’s being worked around? People’s laziness?

            Password managers actually do solve the phishing problem to an extent, since if you’re using it properly, you’ll have a unique password for every service, limiting the scope of the problem.

            Putting TOTP 2fa codes in your password manager behind the same password as everything else actually destroys any additional security added by 2fa, since it puts you back to a single auth factor.

            • jj4211@lemmy.world
              link
              fedilink
              English
              arrow-up
              1
              ·
              8 hours ago

              People’s laziness?

              Well yes, that is a huge one. I know people who when faced with Google’s credible password suggestion say “hell no, I could never remember that”, then proceed to use a leet-speak thinking computers can’t guess those because of years of ‘use a special character to make your password secure’. People at work giving their password to someone else to take care of someething because everything else is a pain and the stakes are low to them. People being told their bank is using a new authentication provider and so they log dutifully into the cited ‘auth provider’, because this is the sort of thing that (generally not banks) do to people.

              to an extent

              Exactly, it mitigates, but still a gap. If they phish for your bank credential, you give them your real bank password. It’s unique, great, but the only thing the attacker wanted was the bank password anyway. If they phish a TOTP, then they have to make sure they use it within a minute, but it can be used.

              actually destroys any additional security added by 2fa

              From the user perspective that knows they are using machine generated passwords, yes, that setup is redundant. However from the service provider perspective, that has no way of enforcing good password hygiene, then at least gives the service provider control over generating the secret. Sure a ‘we pick the password for the user’ would get to the same end, but no one accepts that.

              But this proves that if you are fanatical about MFA, then TOTP doesn’t guarantee it anyway, since the secret can be stuffed into a password manager. Passkey has an ecosystem more affirmatively trying to enforce those MFA principles, even if it is, ultimately, generally in the power of the user to overcome them if they were so empowered (you can restrict to certain vendor keys, but that’s not practical for most scenarios).

              My perspective is that MFA is overblown and mostly fixes some specific weaknesses: -“Thing you know” largely sucks as a factor, if I human can know it, then a machine can guess it, and on the service provider there’s so much risk that such a factor can be guessed at a faster rate than you want, despite mitigations. Especially since you generally let a human select the factor in the first place. It helps mitigate the risk of a lost/stolen badge on a door by also requiring a paired code in terms of physical security, but that’s a context where the building operator can reasonably audit attempts at the secret, which is generally not the case for online services as well. So broadly speaking, the additional factor is just trying to mitigate the crappy nature of “thing you know” -“Thing you have” used to be easier to lose track of or get cloned. A magstripe badge gets run through a skimmer, and that gets replicated. A single-purpose security card gets lost and you don’t think about it because you don’t need it for anything else. The “thing you have” nowadays is likely to lock itself and require local unlocking, essentially being the ‘second factor’ enforced client side. Generally Passkey implementations require just that, locally managed ‘second factor’.

              So broadly ‘2fa is important’ is mostly ‘passwords are bad’ and to the extent it is important, Passkeys are more likely to enforce it than other approaches anyway.

    • cmhe@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      2
      arrow-down
      1
      ·
      22 hours ago

      I use them with bitwarden and a self hosted vaultwarden. If my phone breaks, no issue. If my server breaks, I got local backups… Keys are stored encrypted in a postgres database for which I have access, if I need to restore it. No lock-in issue or risk of loosing access when one or two devices break.

    • sentientRant@lemmy.worldOP
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      1
      arrow-down
      5
      ·
      1 day ago

      Even if you are really careful, your details can always be leaked from a company server during a breach. If the companies adopt passkeys, that issue isn’t there. Because there isn’t a password anyone can randomly use. That’s why I feel big tech companies are moving towards it.

      • Brokkr@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        1
        ·
        5 hours ago

        Yes, you have to trust the company storing the passwords.

        A good company can store passwords in ways that are secure to most hacking attempts. It isn’t impossible to break the encryption typically used, but it is difficult enough that most thieves will not have the resources or time to make use of the data. They want the low effort password databases, not the difficult and expensive ones.

      • xthexder@l.sw0.com
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        4
        ·
        20 hours ago

        Companies should already be storing password hashes, so the risk of leaking a hash vs a public key is roughly the same. It’s just that private keys are generally longer than passwords and therefore harder to bruitforce.

        Any company storing passwords in a recoverable format deserves to be hacked.

    • cenzorrll@piefed.ca
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      1
      arrow-down
      2
      ·
      1 day ago

      I’ve found a pretty good use for a passkey. Docusign. About every 3 months I need to docusign something at work. The process involves logging in, changing your password, logging in again, opening the document, logging in to sign, logging in to finish. The only steps you get to skip if there’s more than one document is the initial log on, and changing password. So with a passkey I just touch it a bunch of times and there’s no password change.

      • Brokkr@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        10
        ·
        1 day ago

        Sounds like a password manager would make that way easier. Changing your password would involve a few extra clicks. Also, you might want to check with your IT folks. Asking people to constantly change their password is a good way to weaken password strength. I don’t use docusign, but there is probably a setting that they can change.

        • cenzorrll@piefed.ca
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          2
          arrow-down
          1
          ·
          1 day ago

          Oh, I agree, but I have to argue enough with professionals who know better as it is. I have to do it every day with recent PhDs as a BA who’s been doing the job for 15 years. At this point it’s not my problem if something happens. I have other things that affect me every day to fight about. I’ll just continue cycling through my no repeats after 10 changes, 12 character passwords and using my yubikey for docusign for my own sanity.

        • cenzorrll@piefed.ca
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          9
          arrow-down
          1
          ·
          1 day ago

          K, I’ll go tell the CEO that they need to come up with something different.

      • JackbyDev@programming.dev
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        11
        arrow-down
        2
        ·
        1 day ago

        Every time I was prompted to use one by plugging my phone in to my computer nothing happened. That was a little over a year ago.

        • Frezik@lemmy.blahaj.zone
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          5
          arrow-down
          1
          ·
          21 hours ago

          It’s been a very seamless experience with Bitwarden. Pretty much “click passkey, now logged in”.

          • JackbyDev@programming.dev
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            4
            arrow-down
            1
            ·
            21 hours ago

            I mean when I was trying to set one up. I wasn’t ever prompted to use a password manager. It just said to plug my phone into my computer. I did. And it didn’t detect anything. With user experience in setup that poor I don’t trust them yet.

            • sonofearth@lemmy.world
              link
              fedilink
              English
              arrow-up
              2
              arrow-down
              1
              ·
              edit-2
              12 hours ago

              What are using lol? I have never been asked to plug in my phone to a computer. I have use Bitwarden and KeepassXC and also used my phone to scan the QR in chromium browsers for passkeys and it just worked in all the browsers flawlessly (even ungoogled chromium). I just want Linux Distros to allow setup a default password manager for the user and implement passkeys auth mechanism for the apps installed in the device.

              • JackbyDev@programming.dev
                link
                fedilink
                English
                arrow-up
                1
                ·
                3 hours ago

                I don’t know what to tell you. Multiple sites and services asked if I wanted to set up a passkey, every time I got prompted to plug my phone in via USB, and nothing happened when I did. At no point in the process did it give me a QR code or ask me if I wanted to set one up through a password manager instead of a phone. I didn’t do anything special or incorrect. I followed the normal prompts they gave me.

    • cmhe@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      2
      arrow-down
      4
      ·
      22 hours ago

      A better, well defined API for password managers to insert login information to the site compared to text boxes.

  • Engywook@lemmy.zip
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    37
    arrow-down
    1
    ·
    1 day ago

    No, thanks. I’ll keep using password+2FA and I hope that passkeys never become “mandatory”.

    • TotalCourage007@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      14
      arrow-down
      1
      ·
      24 hours ago

      Thanks to our dystopian hellscape we live in it’ll become mandatory just like useless online ids. I hate having to explain passkeys to my family. Some fuckface suit who doesn’t use it properly pushed for a portfolio addition.

      • sonofearth@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        2
        ·
        edit-2
        12 hours ago

        But what’s dystopian about passkeys? They are actually more secure than Password + TOTP. Phishing out a passkey is practically impossible.

  • SaraTonin@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    27
    arrow-down
    1
    ·
    1 day ago

    The promise of passkeys when i first grad about them was that it would be quick and easy - that you wouldn’t need to enter a username or use 2fa. The reality appears to be that this is that it’s used ** as** 2fa

    • UnfortunateShort@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      7
      arrow-down
      1
      ·
      1 day ago

      Personally, I found that It works well with Microsoft, Paypal, Google, Shopify and Proton. I was really surprised to find the option on German government sites, worked there as well. Tested in Ungoogled Chromium and Librewolf. The only thing I find dissappointing is adoption

    • Frezik@lemmy.blahaj.zone
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      3
      ·
      21 hours ago

      Most of the sites I’ve seen use it as the single auth source. That said, using multiple forms of authentication in a layered model only improves security.