you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[–] 27 points 1 day ago* (16 children)

This right here. KeepassXC (PC) already had passkey support for a while, KeepassDX (Android) recently implemented support. If you use FOSS implementations, vendor lock-in and potential future corporate enshittification are non-issues.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 16 child comments
  • [–] 10 points 21 hours ago (10 children)

    vendor lock-in and potential future corporate enshittification are non-issues.

    For now.

    In some countries, banks require users use their app on IOS or Google'd Android. You can't use their services via browser, LineageOS, GrapheneOS

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 10 child comments
  • [–] 2 points 5 hours ago

    In some countries, banks require users use their app on IOS or Google’d Android. You can’t use their services via browser, LineageOS, GrapheneOS

    True. I'm kind of affected by this in GOS, although I found a workaround to bludgeon my banking app into submission.

    Still, this is an issue that is already here, and it exists independently of passkeys.

  • source
  • parent
  • [–] 0 points 20 hours ago (8 children)
  • [–] 7 points 12 hours ago (4 children)

    This mentality is so gross. "Well might as well roll over and get pounded in the A by big corpo! what else am I going to do, right? Hehe!"

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 4 child comments
  • [–] 1 point 8 hours ago (3 children)

    So what are you gonna do about i

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 3 child comments
  • [–] 4 points 7 hours ago (2 children)

    Me personally, I'd get a burner smartphone in a drawer just for banking that is on airplane mode 24/7 except when I need it for banking and use a dumbphone for everything else. Also, I run linux and I have strict control over my router and I have ZERO subscriptions and creditcards. It's not much but it's something. Beats blindly rimming apple and alphabet.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 2 child comments
  • [–] 12 points 18 hours ago (2 children)

    Fuck off with that defeatist bullshit.

    Make them drag you ckicking and screaming. Only morons and cowards walk in lock-step with the corpos

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 2 child comments
  • [–] 29 points 1 day ago (3 children)

    The argument from the "it's a trap" article is that the service you are registering to can use attestation to ensure that you are only using passkey managers that they approve.

    I have to admit that I haven't investigated this thoroughly myself but if the protocol can be abused in that way then your only choice really would be not to use the service. If it is related to banking or government services then you may not have much of a choice.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 3 child comments
  • [–] 7 points 23 hours ago (1 child)

    The web api for fido2/passkeys exposes attestation information.

    Warning: Attestation provides a way for a relying party to determine the provenance of an authenticator. Relying parties should not attempt to maintain allowlists of authenticators.

    from https://developer.mozilla.org/en-US/docs/Web/API/Web_Authentication_API

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 1 child comment
  • [–] 7 points 16 hours ago*

    Mozilla's warning is funny. "Don't use this to reject attestations from unapproved authenticators!" That's, like, almost the entire purpose to attestation. It tells you an Apple device or a YubiKey or whatever created the credential. What else could you use this information for other than to make life harder for users using certain authenticators?

  • source
  • parent