Live data from Hacker News

Passkeys will come at a cost

fy.blackhats.net.au

301–310 of 600 posts

Re: Passkeys will come at a cost

#301
post #263
post #128

Earlier quoted context omitted.

That's indeed scary. Losing your 2nd factor shouldn't block you from accessing your accounts indefinitely . There should at least be one recovery path outside 2FA be it "printed recovery keys", "email recovery", "support channels", or even (despite being fully insecure) SMS maybe with a grace period (like 48 hours). Backing up your 2FA secrets isn't user-friendly at all, and it's even harder after you've started usin…

> Losing your 2nd factor shouldn't block you from accessing your accounts indefinitely. You’re absolutely right and also you don’t have to worry. Everyone who operate auth of any sort will be forced on day one to have reasonable recovery. Nobody is gonna lock customers out because you lost their super-secret private key. In practice, it goes back to email recovery for 98% of services. This will remain true with passk…

>I’m also a little worried about public computers, shared devices, borrowing etc. Not everyone has a personal $1000 phone. This whole “my own device” assumption is a first world bias, and the experts should know better.

Exactly. That's why I'm in favour of SMS based auth for really important services like banking and government services. Your phone got broken/lost? Most providers offer replacement sims immediately or in 24h at worst around here. Your phone is broken, but you have an old 20 year old flip phone? Pop your card in there (with a plastic frame) and you can still authenticate (another reason against non physical sim cards).

I saw mentions that SMS is insecure, but I never heard about a credible remote attack that didn't include provider cooperation or taking over your phone. (someone driving to your house and setting up a fake cell tower in your yard doesn't count for most people). Yes, the user experience is annoying to say the least. Consider the current system we have in Poland for government services (taxes, health care, driving agency, benefits). Most people use their bank as the auth provider a typical session would look like this: - go to a gov website, click login, be present with various login options that include personal certs etc, choose your bank from the list - login to your bank's system the normal way (with physical 2fa if you have it, printed keys, or SMS). - then the bank asks you "do you want to provide auth request that contains these personal detail to _gov_agency_A, if yes tick these 4 boxes that absolve us from anything you do down the line - then they send you another SMS to confirm finally authenticating you to the site - you can browse the site etc, but let's say you want to send in a document that requires signing, you fill that document online and they ask you "select your signing provider" (despite already being logged in - you select your bank, you go through two rounds of SMS again to sign the doc - phew... Done

It's rather elaborate and hinges on SMS being secure. Most older people get lost at around "tick these 4 boxes" part, so most likely the whole process is being done for them by a local gov/library/internet cafe employee or a relative.

Is it secure? It's pretty annoying to use, but personally I consider the security adequate. I

Re: Passkeys will come at a cost

#302
post #73

Any form of authentication based on "something you have, but can also lose" is fundamentally broken. Either I'll lose access if I lose the device, or their superior security doesn't matter because the weakest link has to be somewhere else.

Just print backup codes or add second "drawer" key. The whole idea is great, but has several issues: very bad marketing, wierd configuration flow for average user, push for airdropable/cloud synced keys (this is a bad idea) and the most important one, the cost of keys.

Re: Passkeys will come at a cost

#303
post #264
post #235

This is a bit unrelated to the harder crypto stuff but my mom called me freaking out she couldn’t get into her gmail. It turns out Google auto registered her new android phone with a passkey and made that the default Google login with a confusing passkey based interface (expecting her to know to click the second option to login via password or understand wtf a passkey is was too much IMO). It turns out when it said “…

Nit: Passkeys don't get sent to Android. Instead, the Gmail login would ask you to prove you possess the passkey on the Android by scanning a QR code displayed by the browser. However I totally get your point. The UX is confusing. The terminology is confusing. Even if each step in the UX gives you an explanation of what it does, it's still useless because people are trained to skip the small print with explanation an…

The thing is the ergonomics is so much worse than just a password. People that are able to remember secure passwords should be able to use them. A service not offering this option is not going to get used.

We already had some that were proud they have some allegedly superior auth scheme that relied on infrastructure I do not necessarily trust at all.

Re: Passkeys will come at a cost

#304

Earlier quoted context omitted.

passkeys are really defined by the FIDO Alliance Based on FIDO standards, passkeys are a replacement for passwords that provide faster, easier, and more secure sign-ins to websites and apps across a user’s devices. Unlike passwords, passkeys are always strong and phishing-resistant. [1] https://fidoalliance.org/passkeys/

This does not tell me what a passkey actually _is_. The marketing around passkeys is absolutely infuriating.

Tell me about it. All of the terminology around FIDO is super confusing, and FIDO themselves make no effort to clarify or acknowledge the confusion.

Everyone (including Yubico) uses the terminology incorrectly in a way that makes it super hard to get to the bottom things.

Re: Passkeys will come at a cost

#305

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Knowing ahead of that problem, you can plan a solution though? Everything I have is cloud-synced and even if I lose my phone right now in a random country, I definitely know how I can recover all my 2FA tokens and logins from a random terminal (or preferably a new boxed phone) -- I DO have to remember some passcodes which I otherwise never use but that's not too hard. If Google or Apple implements this, they can desi…

> I DO have to remember some passcodes which I otherwise never use but that's not too hard. Right, but you're giving up a lot of security to do this, since it implies with these rare passcodes someone else could also bootstrap your logins. With HW tokens, you don't have to worry about recovery passcodes being leaked/hacked (the recommended procedure today is to print out the recovery codes and destroy digital copies)…

This idea of printing out recovery codes seems so deeply out of touch with basically everyone leading a modern digital life that I can't believe serious security experts actually recommend it with a straight face.

No one has a printer anymore, and I'm sure as hell not including a trip to a local printshop as a part of signing up to 2FA for some random site (yes, even Gmail).

Re: Passkeys will come at a cost

#306
post #262
post #83

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Hardware tokens (Yubikeys, etc) are signed by their vendor. They support attestation which allows q site to disallow vendors not in a white list. Some banks (Vanguard was/is one) actually enforce this preventing all but a handful of hardware keys from working with their 2FA.

From https://www.chromium.org/security-keys/ : > Chrome’s users have an interest in ensuring a healthy and interoperable ecosystem of Security Keys. To this end, public websites that restrict the set of allowed Security Keys should do so based on articulable, technical considerations. They should regularly update their set of trusted attestation roots that meet their policies (for example, from the FIDO Metadata Serv…

This principle will last until there is some major Chinese key provider that adheres to all the standards. Then, we'll go the way of TikTok with "risks because of control by the Party".

Re: Passkeys will come at a cost

#307
post #235

This is a bit unrelated to the harder crypto stuff but my mom called me freaking out she couldn’t get into her gmail. It turns out Google auto registered her new android phone with a passkey and made that the default Google login with a confusing passkey based interface (expecting her to know to click the second option to login via password or understand wtf a passkey is was too much IMO). It turns out when it said “…

>Terrible UX by Google

Honestly these days I do a double take when a piece of UI is not terrible.

Re: Passkeys will come at a cost

#308
Why not simply allow users to specify any public ssh key as an authentication factor? And create a UI around that? Why do we need to create more and more new security crap that no sane person understands?

Re: Passkeys will come at a cost

#309
post #308

Why not simply allow users to specify any public ssh key as an authentication factor? And create a UI around that? Why do we need to create more and more new security crap that no sane person understands?

And how many sane persons will understand what a public ssh key is?

Re: Passkeys will come at a cost

#310
post #308

Why not simply allow users to specify any public ssh key as an authentication factor? And create a UI around that? Why do we need to create more and more new security crap that no sane person understands?

And how many sane persons will understand what a public ssh key is?

That's what the UI is for.
Post reply on HN