Live data from Hacker News

Apple, Google and Microsoft Commit to Expanded Support for FIDO Standard

fidoalliance.org

141–150 of 525 posts

Re: Apple, Google and Microsoft Commit to Expanded Support for FIDO Standard

#141
post #139

I don't trust Google or Apple to be my main authentication provider, or to manage syncing my private key. Their customer service is terrible and they are way too arbitrary on locking folks out. I would trust my bank (well, my credit union.) I can go see them in person if I need to and they take my lawyer seriously, they also take security seriously, they're properly regulated, and ultimately they're my main concern i…

[deleted]

[deleted]

Re: Apple, Google and Microsoft Commit to Expanded Support for FIDO Standard

#142

This passwordless signin process sounds neat, but will it increase Google’s power to lock people out of things? I don’t understand why Google doesn’t have an ombudsman - consumers have no recourse when Google locks them out, and it seems the consequences of Google locking you out are ever increasing. I think we’re going to need legislation to force Google to make a proper appeals process.

[deleted]

Re: Apple, Google and Microsoft Commit to Expanded Support for FIDO Standard

#143
post #29

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Normal usage would require a reauthentication - i.e. FaceId or TouchId - to produce the passkey.

Currently on the iPhone, if your FaceID or TouchID fail repeatedly, you have the option to type in the passcode, which grants the same access. I'm not sure if the same is true on Android. I think the more general point is that "able to unlock the phone" is not / should not be the same as "I have verified that this is you" for sensitive applications and information.

I just tested with two banks' apps. They both allow touch ID with fallback to a bank-account-specific PIN - not the phone passcode.

Of course, if you've enrolled your kid's fingerprints they'd have access.

Re: Apple, Google and Microsoft Commit to Expanded Support for FIDO Standard

#144

I don't trust Google or Apple to be my main authentication provider, or to manage syncing my private key. Their customer service is terrible and they are way too arbitrary on locking folks out. I would trust my bank (well, my credit union.) I can go see them in person if I need to and they take my lawyer seriously, they also take security seriously, they're properly regulated, and ultimately they're my main concern i…

> Their customer service is terrible Let me add my recent experience in the bucket. Few days ago I upgraded my legacy Workspace account to a business account. (I was in a time crunch; couldn't evaluate alternatives.) I enter my debit card details in the checkout and got a generic error message asking me to "try again later." Thought there was something wrong with their service and tried the next day. Same error. Afte…

> I'm seriously considering moving elsewhere.

I recently moved my family's legacy GSuite service over to Fastmail, and it seems like they've carefully planned for this exact scenario. Account setup on each device is as simple as downloading a configuration profile with a QR code. And Fastmail has a built-in option to authenticate to your old Google account and pull all your mail over to the new account, preserving all the details, and then keep sync'ing until you're ready to turn the old account off. I thought I was going to have to sync things myself. Nope! Took all of five minutes to set up my account and sync. Couple weeks later I deactivated the old GSuite accounts.

And now I'm a customer again, which feels good, even though it means spending actual money.

Re: Apple, Google and Microsoft Commit to Expanded Support for FIDO Standard

#146

So their vision of the future is that to do anything online, one MUST have a phone (ahem, portable wiretap)? And they're going to be keeping my secrets for me, for my own good? I'm not sure I'm down with any of that.

It's literally the opposite. You "must" have a cryptographic device (a dongle) that is only doing that one thing, authentication. Doesn't have a built in radio (unless for NFC, if you want it), doesn't have any microphone or camera, doesn't store any data beyond what's needed to authenticate, doesn't communicate except to authenticate - bi-directionally, so phishing is no longer a thing, or at least it's a lot harder…

The primary case for FIDO is a company like google or apple revoking your access and they have no/limited ways of recovering your account.

Re: Apple, Google and Microsoft Commit to Expanded Support for FIDO Standard

#147
post #21

Dumb question: why are biometrics being used to replace the password , shouldn't the biometric replace the username ?

Without making any explicit argument for it, what I see coming out of Fido and U2F are really changing the importance of the long-standing "something you have, something you know..." mindset around security. That prior mode was not helping us design system that take human capabilities of the user into account. Prior security seemed to focus entirely on attackers, and their agency, and what they could potentially do.…

> Without making any explicit argument for it, what I see coming out of Fido and U2F are really changing the importance of the long-standing "something you have, something you know..." mindset around security. That prior mode was not helping us design system that take human capabilities of the user into account.

Don’t think that’s quite true. It’s continuation of the old “something you know”, “something you have” and “something you are” authentication factors, and the idea that at least two factors should be used to authenticate.

The username/password approach is only a single factor, “something you know”.

Common 2FA solutions use “something you know” (you’re password) and “something you have” (a device proven via OTP or SMS).

FIDO with biometrics trades all that for 2FA driven by “something you are” (biometrics) and “something you have” (you’re devices Secure Enclave).

You don’t send you biometrics to the service your authenticating with. Rather you’re using your biometrics to prove “something you are” to your device, which your device then mixes with a private key which proves you’re in possession of a known device. All of that is then used to authenticate with your service.

In order to enable a cloud synced private key, you need the syncing process to require 2FA to enable new devices. The 2FA process can be clunky and slow, because you only need to do once per device enrolment. Indeed it’s need to be clunkier, because you don’t have a biometric factor available for use, as the enrolment process is normally used to onboard both a device and a device specific biometric factor.

After that you’re device becomes a know authenticated device, which can be used as “something you have” factor for authentication.

All of this isn’t a change from long standing authentication strategy. It’s just a refinement of process to make the underlying authentication strategy user friendly.

Re: Apple, Google and Microsoft Commit to Expanded Support for FIDO Standard

#148
Are there any FIDO security keys that explicitly support backing up and restoring their master secrets? I would love to move from Username + Password + TOTP but my current workflow requires that I am able to regain access to my digital accounts using nothing but a few page paper backup including core service passwords & exported TOTP secrets.

Re: Apple, Google and Microsoft Commit to Expanded Support for FIDO Standard

#149
post #21

Dumb question: why are biometrics being used to replace the password , shouldn't the biometric replace the username ?

Not it shouldn't. If you wanted to associate various devices (phone, laptop, etc) to the same account it wouldn't work. The fingerprint produced by each device is different.

You associate biometric credentials to a username for that.

Re: Apple, Google and Microsoft Commit to Expanded Support for FIDO Standard

#150
post #72

I've resisted switching to a hardware key because I know that I'm going to break it, and that seems like a huge pain in the ass. I really want to be able to make a couple of backup keys, or maybe put another way, I want to be able to put the private key on the device myself, I don't necessarily care that the key is generated on the device and never leaves the device. I don't care if that slightly reduces my security…

>my threat model is me leaving my key in my pants pocket before putting it in the washing machine. "YubiKey Survives Ten Weeks in a Washing Machine" I think you'll be safe! :) https://www.yubico.com/press-releases/yubikey-survives-ten-w...

I was about to say the same thing. These things are quite sturdy and if you loose your key (as people do) you retire the old one and make a new. These things are neither expensive nor irreplaceable. Of course if you loose your key it's going to hurt, as it should.

I've had a Yubi Key for almost 5 years now. Zero issues.

Post reply on HN