Comment

Comment on Google will now make passkeys the default for personal accounts

You have a lot of incorrect assumptions

No I don’t. You either misunderstood what I wrote about or don’t understand how whole process works. There’s no denial that signing in with passkeys is more secure. Technology has been there for a while and it’s proven. But that’s only one part of the whole process.

However, even the site you linked states:

When a user is asked to sign in to an app or website, the user approves the sign-in with the same biometric or PIN or on-device password that the user has to unlock their device (phone, computer, or security key). The app or website can use this mechanism instead of the traditional username and password.

Problem is in biometric or PIN on device. Which is what I talked about, you replace 2 factors with a single point of authentication. No matter how secure data exchange between site and device is, getting hold of your device means there’s a potential to losing access.

They claim second factor and password can be fished, but so can your PIN, and it’s even easier since it’s usually short. Whole security idea they are proposing is removing human factor completely from the authentication process. Which in general is not a bad idea to get rid of bad habits people have but at the same time, those bad habits are just relocated elsewhere. There are number of YouTube videos showcasing how easy it is to bypass lock screen patterns and PINs. Not to mention huge amount of people who simply don’t want to have any sort of security on their phone.

They claim passkeys are multi-factor in essence, but that’s not true. Whole point of multi-factor authentication is to make it harder to posses all things needed to exploit the data. Access to ATM requires card and pin, one thing you posses other have in your head. OTP works the same way, user/pass for web and then device you posses generates one time password. Having everything in one place is like locking your door and leaving the key beneath the door mat. Key can be as elaborate as it wants to, if someone lifts the door mat, whole security goes away.

source

Sort:hotnew top

confusedbytheBasics@lemmy.world ⁨1⁩ ⁨year⁩ ago
Use a pair of hardware tokens and a long pin if you want maximum security. If you want to use a sync-able software token do that and set a strong pin.

You like long passwords? Go ahead and put one on your passkeys. You don’t have to use a short pin.

It is two factor. Something you have, key in TPM or hardware token, and something you know: the PIN. Or if you choose to enable biometric it shifts to two things you have the: key and your face/fingerprint.

Remember you only have limited attempts to guess the PIN and biometric auth is subject to configurable timeout conditions before the PIN is required.

Any security conscious person will use a strong PIN. Many will choose to use biometrics as well for convenience. Most people are still setting their password to Sm3llyK@t42 on every website. A protected key and a 4-digit pin/finger print is a huge leap in security.

source
- MeanEYE@lemmy.world ⁨1⁩ ⁨year⁩ ago
  But that’s the whole thing we are trying to solve here. We are trying to eliminate human factor and by extension bad habits people have when it comes to security. So expecting people to use good passwords and pins for keys will be the same as expecting people to have good passwords for accounts. Perhaps even worse because of claims it’s better security so people might even relax more.
  
  Also timeouts with pins and passwords mean very little once someone has your device. This is why I don’t consider it good two-factor. PIN might be in your head, but nothing is preventing someone brute forcing it. Once you image the device you can do whatever you want. With credit cards, you’d need ATM to keep doing it and lockout is a serious problem there.
  
  It’s a step in right direction for sure, but I’d prefer if keys didn’t depend on PIN or password.
  
  source
  - confusedbytheBasics@lemmy.world ⁨1⁩ ⁨year⁩ ago
    
    But that’s the whole thing we are trying to solve here. We are trying to eliminate human factor and by extension bad habits people have when it comes to security. So expecting people to use good passwords and pins for keys will be the same as expecting people to have good passwords for accounts. Perhaps even worse because of claims it’s better security so people might even relax more.
    
    I feel like it’s 2001 and I’m trying to convince my users to switch from passwords to RSA keys for SSH. Yes there are potential weaknesses. Yes it’s still much better.
    
    Also timeouts with pins and passwords mean very little once someone has your device. This is why I don’t consider it good two-factor. PIN might be in your head, but nothing is preventing someone brute forcing it. Once you image the device you can do whatever you want. With credit cards, you’d need ATM to keep doing it and lockout is a serious problem there.
    
    Even if all we’ve done is reduced potential attackers from everyone with an Internet connection to people with physical access to the device we’ve still massively increased the average user’s security. And we’ve done more than that.
    
    Also unless you can clone the device somehow hitting max guesses and losing access just like an ATM is part of the design.
    
    It’s a step in right direction for sure, but I’d prefer if keys didn’t depend on PIN or password.
    
    I lost track of your suggestion over the weekend but what was your suggestion for second factor other than a pin or password?
    
    source
    MeanEYE@lemmy.world ⁨1⁩ ⁨year⁩ ago
    I didn’t have one, I just disliked the idea of having all that’s needed for auth in a single device which can be lost.
    
    source
    -> View More Comments