1000
Bitwarden's new CEO has a Private Equity background, removed 'Inclusion' and 'Always Free' from their website -- because of course he did (www.fastcompany.com)
submitted 3 months ago* (last edited 3 months ago) by to c/selfhosted@lemmy.world
229 comments fedilink hide all child comments
 

In the latest episode of "they will always sell you out" - they sold you out! Who would've thought.

Hoping for a good alternative client to appear, the writing is on the wall. Vaultwarden can't exist without "leeching" off of Bitwarden.

you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[–] 20 points 3 months ago (11 children)

Two articles behind a paywall, one that won’t load, and another article that says the big problem with passkeys is…people are unfamiliar with them.

If anyone tells you that Passkeys are bad, they’re a liar. Way more safe than passwords, full stop.

Just don’t let Microsoft or Apple tie them to your device. You don’t have to do that.

  • permalink
  • fedilink
  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 11 child comments
    •
  • [–] 6 points 3 months ago (6 children)

    Are you calling me a liar? That's pretty weird; it's not like I'm telling you to stick to passwords while I move to passkeys. With that said, though, get Bypass Paywalls Clean (Mozilla-only, as far as I know) and you'll never see another paywall again. I forgot about having that.

    Just don’t let Microsoft or Apple tie them to your device. You don’t have to do that.

    The problem is that this is where it's eventually going to lead to.

  • permalink
  • fedilink
  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 6 child comments
    •
  • [–] 3 points 3 months ago (3 children)

    Not really, Vaultwarden/bitwa4den offer passkey support. When I log into a service a popup shows on my extension, I click it and I'm in. It's not gonna lead to device locking if you don't want to...

  • permalink
  • fedilink
  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 3 child comments
    •
  • [–] 2 points 3 months ago (2 children)

    except when the wide populace starts accepting it being device locked, and your opinion does not matter anymore to those making the decisions

  • permalink
  • fedilink
  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 2 child comments
    •
  • [–] 1 point 3 months ago* (1 child)

    No one of the people I know that use passkeys use it from the phone, either they use a password manager, they have passwords on a physical note, on an excel file in the desktop, a physical yubikey, or bitwarden like me. That's everyone I physically know including every family member, friends and work people.

    I know it's anecdotal, but you present your "wide populace" fact without giving sources too, and since I know no one that uses phone based passkeys, even if my experience is anecdotal, I say sus. Check your bias.

  • permalink
  • fedilink
  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 1 child comment
    •
  • [–] 1 point 3 months ago

    but you present your "wide populace" fact without giving sources too

    my statement is not that many people are using passkeys today. but that if there comes a time when many people will use passkeys, they will be as careless and convenient as they are with everything else today, accepting any restrictions, because "why would anyone not use Google Passkeys? It's the most convenient thing!".

    and not only that. I was talking about device locking but that's only part of the problem. isn't it that passkey receiving services can identify the client software, and decide they will only accept passkeys from x and y clients?

  • permalink
  • fedilink
  • source
  • parent
  • [–] 3 points 3 months ago (1 child)

    At the very least you're misguided or don't know what you're talking about. Passkeys are not vendor locked in and of themselves.

    You can make the same argument against password managers because most iPhone users that use them, use Apple's one.

  • permalink
  • fedilink
  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 1 child comment
    •
  • [–] 6 points 3 months ago* (last edited 3 months ago)

    They will almost certainly lead to vendor lock in. Why do you think they won't? Apple's password manager is definitely an example of vendor lock in. Many others have a simple to use export feature to CSV or something that others can understand

    Edit: it could be that you don't know what the WebAuthn/FIDO2 specification says or we understand it differently? Do you know how the attestation mechanism works? That ties the key to a device or software authenticator (the software authenticator is likely going to tie it to the device somehow, possibly even via a TEE).

  • permalink
  • fedilink
  • source
  • parent
  • [–] 3 points 3 months ago (3 children)

    There is no full stop there... A password that is sufficiently long will never be cracked no matter the hashing algorithm in use. Passwords are easily transferrable and can be communicated to a third party in the event of an emergency. They also provide tunable security, where you can trade off security for convenience if you want.

    Some (not all, I know) passkeys are tied to a device. Stolen device means stolen passkey, and it's potentially very difficult to recover from that. Passkeys are also locked to a certain standard, passwords have no such restrictions.

    Tbh I don't understand the move for passkeys replacing passwords. They should become the second factor when a user wants additional security. They're perfect for that niche.

  • permalink
  • fedilink
  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 3 child comments
    •
  • [–] 4 points 3 months ago

    Passkeys provide a secure way to authenticate while also being convenient. With the tradeoffs you mentioned.

    I don’t like the push for only allowing some vendors to issue keys and to not allowing exporting and backups. And password should still be an option.

  • permalink
  • fedilink
  • source
  • parent
  • [–] 1 point 3 months ago (1 child)

    Password can also very easily be stolen during phishing, while passkeys are phishing resistant.

    And while a hardware passkeys can be stole and used, those who steal them will still need the pin to use them, and the two major hardware passkeys options now (Yubico and Token2) both have some pin brute force protection in their firmware to slow someone down long enough for an account to be secured another way.

    As for passkeys on phones, they require the pin or biometric used to unlock the phones to be used.

  • permalink
  • fedilink
  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 1 child comment
    •
  • [–] 1 point 3 months ago*

    "Difficult to recover from" was referencing setting all of your accounts back up. I should have also included "lost" and "broken" to make that more obvious. Many hardware (most? all?) passkeys do not allow for backup and restore.

    But I do see an issue with stolen hardware passkeys being used for access too if they're a primary factor. With the mitigations you mentioned hopefully holding up.

  • permalink
  • fedilink
  • source
  • parent