On Fri, Aug 1, 2025 at 8:05 AM Sriram Karra <[email protected]> wrote:

*@udhay* I agree the communication problem is real. Given the scope and
> ambition of passkeys, various questions like *"What are they", "How do I
> use them", "What do they give me", "How do they work under the hood", "I
> already use security keys; how are these any better" *all need to be
> answered, and at different levels for different cohorts of users. But yes,
> definitely no one should have to hear about or understand PKI to understand
> what passkeys can do for them.
>

There are also various implementation issues, as the article
<https://systemsapproach.org/2024/10/14/can-passkeys-replace-passwords/>
Tim shared alluded to.  E.g, with my google account, after adding a
passkey, for some reason the pre-existing hardware token based 2FA
(yubikey) stopped working. I haven't bothered to spend time debugging this
yet but it's an irritant.

If you can help with this, drop me a DM.


> But allow me to push back on one of your assertions:
>
> *Udhay > From a purely operational (and not theoretical) perspective,
> passkeys are multiple things. They are credentials that live either in your
> password manager (in which case they are portable) or in your phone, or
> perhaps your FIDO2 key (in which cases they are not).*
>
> From a purely operational perspective, how is that different from saying 
> "*passwords
> are multiple things because you can save it to Apple Notes **or commit it
> to memory** (in which cases they are portable), or write it down in a
> physical notebook (in which case they are not)?"*
>
> A passkey is just a credential. And users have agency over where to store
> them; they can be stored on general purpose computing devices (phones,
> tables, laptops, desktops), or on special purpose devices (security keys).
> Where you choose to store the passkey bestows additional security and
> usability properties, just like having your password committed to memory,
> written down in a notebook in your house, or saved away in a bank deposit
> box allow different affordances but don't change what a password actually
> is.
>

Fair enough, as far as it goes - although I will add the nitpick that in
the above example, one can write the same password down in a different
piece of paper, but can't do that with a passkey bound to a device or
hardware key. :)

Udhay
-- 
Silklist mailing list
[email protected]
https://mailman.panix.com/listinfo.cgi/silklist

Reply via email to