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

  • Septimaeus@infosec.pub
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    3
    arrow-down
    1
    ·
    5 hours ago

    Thanks for the great article! I had a question re: the top disadvantage you mention (lock-in).

    Background: Although the on-device integration for Apple, Google, etc. use their cloud for E2E sync between devices, it appears KeePassXC using their passkey interception, discovery, and import procedures accomplish the same cross-device passkey implementation without needing a particular vendor cloud lock-in. As best I can tell, this meets the original standard’s sync fabric requirements (whether or not the big providers like it) and relies on platform-specific APIs mostly for interoperability.

    Question: If KeePass has been able to implement their own sync this way, and the FIDO standard accommodates non-OS providers (e.g. browsers or PW managers), what is currently the biggest technical hurdle remaining for FOSS-based passkey providers?

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

      Thank you… and Yes you are right… There could be many reasons like greed or could be risk management if you think from both ends of spectrum. It’s sad actually they are developed on the same FIDO2 but insists on being seperate which is weird… Also they feel that regular user wouldn’t be able to set up FOSS passkey provider or may be they lose control over encryption if they share with third party.