• jet@hackertalks.com
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    37
    ·
    9 months ago

    If you really want passkeys, put them in a password manager you control. But don’t use a platform controlled passkey store, and be very careful with security keys.

    Amazing article. Lots of great inside baseball. I’m a big proponent of hardware security keys, the whole pass key thing didn’t make sense to me. Especially the resident keys. If you user workflow is terrible, nobody is going to use them. Which is even worse than not existing

          • jet@hackertalks.com
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            3
            ·
            9 months ago

            https://developers.yubico.com/Passkeys/Passkey_concepts/Discoverable_vs_non-discoverable_credentials.html

            While non-discoverable credentials are not considered passkeys, you should still be aware of them as there are still a number of valid scenarios where your application will need to support the use of them - especially as they are still valid WebAuthn credentials. These are credentials that cannot be generically invoked by a relying party. Instead a user will need to prompt the relying party with a username (user handle) to have the application provide a list of credential IDs to denote which credential(s) can be leveraged for authentication.

            Fido2 webauthn non-discoverable credentials are completely unlimited. Because the private key is on the yubikey directly. The only downside of this, is you have to type in your username first, but I think that’s an upside personally. I do not want anybody who compels disclosure of my hardware security key, to see all the accounts on it.

              • jet@hackertalks.com
                link
                fedilink
                English
                arrow-up
                2
                ·
                edit-2
                9 months ago

                The non-discoverable keys cannot be removed from the device. The secret is non-transferable.

                In the yubikey bio series, this is implemented as a second factor. So you log in, and then present your hardware key as a second factor. You need your fingerprint, the key, your username. Fairly secure.

                I think this is a more secure model than pass keys as they’re being promoted today

    • kevincox@lemmy.ml
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      4
      ·
      9 months ago

      My biggest problem with hardware keys are replacement. If I lost one of my keys and get a replacement I would now need to go to a hundred sites and enroll the new key (and remove the old one). Until this workflow is automated I can only reasonably use hardware keys with a small number of “critical” accounts.

      So for 99% of sites I’m going to use a synced software key.

      • jet@hackertalks.com
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        3
        ·
        9 months ago

        That is a reasonable use case for software keys, maybe the sweet spot is using a hardware key to lock your software keys.

    • umbrella@lemmy.ml
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      3
      arrow-down
      1
      ·
      9 months ago

      ive been saying dont trust corpos on this one, and being downvoted every time.