Pepperidge Farm Remembers when the FIDO Alliance threatened to recommend the blocking of FOSS implemententions because they gave the users control. Control over backing up. Control over not using biometrics.

When something wants too much power, you must avoid.

This is why I only use passkeys that are stored in my self hosted vault warden. As long as you don't create passkeys locked to a vendor's manager, I don't see any reason to avoid them.

If your security relies on a password, you will always be anxious that somebody, somewhere, has somehow figured out what it is and already has access to your bank account.

No I won't. All my passwords are something like I0!2b6KJ!eA04WiJ&&MFToCQ7CN*4mvb and each is used for only one thing because I've been using a password manager for over a decade.

Never used. Each time a website asks me if I want to create one I have this uneasy feeling of not actually owning the key.

Passkeys give me anxiety because it's like "Hope you can go the rest of your life without a phone or USB drive getting lost or stolen LMAO"

TIL what passkeys are. Thx for sharing.

This is the feature that means you no longer get to make the calls about your passkeys. Fortunately, attested passkeys are not yet required on most websites. But the FIDO Alliance standard makes attestation a part of the passkey ecosystem, whether you want it or not. And even if the website doesn’t require attestation now, simply by using passkeys you indicate to the website that your setup supports the FIDO Alliance’s passkey standard and that you as a user are capable of using passkeys.9 This means that once Twitter (formally X) is satisfied that the overwhelming majority of its users would be unaffected, they can flip the switch – perhaps not all at once, perhaps just for ten thousand users at a time so as not to cause a fuss – and start rejecting non-attested passkeys.

Critically, remote attestation requires the co-operation of your cryptoprocessor, your passkey manager software, your device’s operating system, and your device’s firmware to all pass the remote attestation check. After all, your phone’s operating system has total access to all the 0s and 1s in every app that’s ever run, so it’s not enough for Twitter (formally X) to trust your passkey manager if it can’t even trust your phone’s underlying operating system. If any single one of those things were to fail – say, because your phone stopped receiving security updates so you installed a custom operating system like LineageOS to keep yourself safe without having to buy a new device – then Twitter (formally X) will be able to notice and prevent you from logging in.

Remote attestation can allow them to verify that your device is not capable of, say, sending and receiving encrypted messages, or running a competitor’s app, or using social media without verifying your ID. They don’t want you to be able to turn off the mandatory built-in AI image scanner on your phone that scans everything your phone sees for nudity. (Yes, I’m serious.)

The convenience of using passkeys is a double-edged sword.

This is also one of the ways Playstation stops you from installing Linux and other unauthorised software on the PS5.

Despite the attention-grabbing headline, the only negative thing I can find in the article about passkeys are this section:

Attested passkeys7 are the last but most important type of passkeys you need to know about. These types of keys use what’s known as remote attestation to cryptographically verify – using the aforementioned tamper-proof cryptoprocessor that lives in all your modern devices – that you are using one of the several approved passkey managers, and not using a custom one that you vibecoded yourself and which can lie.

This is the feature that means you no longer get to make the calls about your passkeys. Fortunately, attested passkeys are not yet required on most websites.

I don't see why we should assume this hypothetical is going to happen. There is a lot of different software that supports passkeys (I use keepass for example), and going against the open standard and forcing all their users to use a specific software would basically make them unusable.

Overall every password / login style has its dangers and bad ways to use it, including passkeys. That doesn't make them "traps".

An attempt to make an image describing where passkeys live:

So it’s HDMI for login? Thanks, I hate it.

Ah there's that phrase again, remote attestation. That has very quickly become my least favourite phrase, and I've yet to see an example of it that benefits the end user. I didn't know passkeys supported it but I'll be avoiding them even harder now that I know they do.

I've already been avoiding them because I don't see how there's any security advantage over TOTP unless the passkey is the only way to access the account (which would be awful for account recovery). And the concept of tying my login to a specific device is stupid. I also don't appreciate how many websites keep trying to stealthily create passkeys automatically on login without explaining what they are or letting the user make an informed decision.

Zero trust is the end station, if you allow organizations to treat your personal devices as being theirs. Organizations that could actually benefit from the increased security (which isn't Twitter, except for some high-profile individuals, maybe), should provide the user with resources to do so, at their expense (issuing a dedicated TOTP device for example).

But what tends to happen instead, is enshittification of service, while offloading it onto the client. A similar trend can be observed with car parking: where operators remove parking meters, and require the customer to use their device and data plan, to make a payment to the operator...

We've been on this trajectory for quite a while now: from Outlook enforcing IT-policies of email administrators (dictating screen locking requirements as device administration app), to SMS-based 2FA requiring one to have a mobile phone number and tying all to this tamper-resistant identifier. So why not a black box snitch, paid for by the client, further restrict their freedom for "security"?

It seems perfectly in line, and I think this article draws all the right parallels.

I suspected as much, being shoved on us like AI.

SQRL, been around before passkeys, it's portable, and it's FOSS.

Please just stop using a service when it gets unbearable. There is no online service you -need- except maybe bank and tax stuff.

As far as I know using a password manager such as KeePassXC or Bitwarden solves all of these problems?

It's wild seeing people spaz out over passkeys, clearly venting at something that isn't passkeys.

finally people are waking up to this garbage.