this post was submitted on 14 Oct 2024
490 points (99.6% liked)

Privacy

31974 readers
236 users here now

A place to discuss privacy and freedom in the digital world.

Privacy has become a very important issue in modern society, with companies and governments constantly abusing their power, more and more people are waking up to the importance of digital privacy.

In this community everyone is welcome to post links and discuss topics related to privacy.

Some Rules

Related communities

Chat rooms

much thanks to @gary_host_laptop for the logo design :)

founded 5 years ago
MODERATORS
 

Looks like a huge amount of security vendors are working to have a secure and open standard for passkey portability between platforms.

It is always good to see major collaboration in the security space like this considering the harsh opinions that users of some of these vendors have toward many of the others. I just wish apps and sites would stop making me login with username and password if passkeys are meant to replace that lol.

top 50 comments
sorted by: hot top controversial new old
[–] [email protected] 9 points 1 month ago (1 children)

I have my passkeys in my keepass file in my private cloud since about 6month using strongbox on iOS and KeepassXC on Linux. Sadly, not many websites support passkeys on firefox for linux desktop yet… Hope this helps!

[–] [email protected] 4 points 1 month ago (1 children)

Lol, I'm a semi-noob and this sentence is really intimating.

[–] [email protected] 3 points 1 month ago

Keepass is a style of encrypted file with a list of the passwords and the syntax is standardised. There are many apps/programs for any platform that offer pw management based on that file. I use keepassXC app on linux and strongbox on iOS since both of them are well integrated into the operating systems. On ios i use the webDav protocol to sync the keepass file on my server with strongbox app. On Linux I use nextcloud sync to mount my files on the server into linux and in keepassXC I have set it to automatically grab that keepass file on boot. Ah of course the keypass file is protected by a strong password, but this could as well be a hardware token like a yubikey. But if you have a yubikey, you just store your passkeys on that😂

[–] [email protected] 11 points 1 month ago (2 children)

Why is the buzz around passkeys is back? I am seeing them way more often than they used to be. I think I have created passkeys for 2 apps and don't even know how that worked, it such a breeze that almost felt it wasn't secure lol.

In what ways the passkeys are different than authenticator apps?

[–] [email protected] 15 points 1 month ago

Passkeys are meant to replace password-based login whereas TOTP apps are only meant as a 2FA method.

[–] [email protected] 8 points 1 month ago (1 children)

Convenience and security.

Authenticator apps are still vulnerable to phishing, passkeys are not.

[–] [email protected] 13 points 1 month ago (1 children)

With the ability to transfer passkeys, the attack vector phishing does not sound that far fetched. Tho i have not looked into the transfer process.

We will see i guess.

[–] [email protected] 2 points 1 month ago (1 children)

Idk, a SSH-Key is also transferrable, yet it's still safe

And given that Passkeys are essentially specialized ssh-keys, I don't see the Problem.

But I'd like to know it I'm wrong.

[–] [email protected] 3 points 1 month ago (1 children)

Why do you think SSH-Keys are safe against phishing? I mean it is unlikely, that someone will just send the key per mail or upload it somewhere since most ppl using SSH-Keys are more knowledgeable.

When you now get an easy one click solution to transfer Passkeys from one Cloud provider to another it will get easier to trick a user to do that. Scenario: You get a mail from Microsoft that there is a thread and that you need to transfer your keys to their cloud.

[–] [email protected] 1 points 1 month ago (2 children)

The thing is, that you only have to share public keys and never private ones. So you can only phish public keys…

[–] [email protected] 2 points 1 month ago* (last edited 1 month ago) (1 children)

You share public keys when registering the passkey on a third party service, but for the portability of the keys to other password managers (what the article is about) the private ones do need to be transferred (that's the whole point of making them portable).

I think the phishing concerns are about attackers using this new portability feature to get a user (via phishing / social engineering) to export/move their passkeys to the attacker's store. The point is that portability shouldn't be so user-friendly / transparent that it becomes exploitable.

That said, I don't know if this new protocol makes things THAT easy to port (probably not?).

[–] [email protected] 1 points 1 month ago* (last edited 1 month ago)

Well, they made it very secure with the transfer of passwords /s

It felt so strange having a CSV file with all my passwords and 2FA secrets in plain text in my downloads folder..

Imagine if would not have used a encrypted partition, my passwords may still be on that disk…

[–] [email protected] 2 points 1 month ago (1 children)

The thing is, that you only have to share public keys and never private ones. So you can only phish public keys…

How would you sync or transfer a passkey across devices without transferring the private key?

[–] [email protected] 3 points 1 month ago (2 children)

That’s July question: the article even points that out. If previously the private key was in hardware, never exposed, but now it has to be available to software. Does it open any potential attacks?

Even if it is less secure, this is probably a good thing to prevent vendor lock-in. I know that’s one reason I rarely use passkeys

[–] [email protected] 2 points 1 month ago

Yea, I strictly did not set up any passkeys until I got strongbox pro, to store it outside of apple walled garden. To get 2FA secrets was hard enough (had long time no macOS device, only iOS)

[–] [email protected] 1 points 1 month ago (1 children)

That was a rhetorical question towards the commenter since the discussion point was not understood.

[–] [email protected] 2 points 1 month ago

I read it again and agree 😂

[–] [email protected] 89 points 1 month ago* (last edited 1 month ago) (1 children)

Seems like people in the comments are misunderstaning the announcement entirely. This protocol is about import and export from password managers and not about having them synced between devices. It would prevent a lock in effect. This is a great development!

FIDO Alliance’s draft specifications – Credential Exchange Protocol (CXP) and Credential Exchange Format (CXF) – define a standard format for transferring credentials in a credential manager including passwords, passkeys and more to another provider in a manner that ensures transfer are not made in the clear and are secure by default.

[–] [email protected] 4 points 1 month ago (1 children)

Lock in effect of passkeys is just infuriating 😂good to see progress!

[–] [email protected] 1 points 1 month ago (2 children)

I personally like it. Imo passkeys should optimally be device bound and the private keys should be stored in TPM or equivalent and be non-exportable.

[–] [email protected] 1 points 1 month ago

When most sites refer to passkeys, they're typically talking about the software-backed kind that are stored in password managers or browsers. There are still device-bound passkeys though. Also since they're just FIDO/WebAuthn credentials under the hood, you can still use hardware-backed systems to store them if you really want.

While you're right that device bound and non-exportable would be best from a security standpoint, there needs to be sufficient adoption of the tech by sites for it to be usable at all and sufficient adoption requires users to have options that have less friction/cost associated with them, like browser and password-manager based ones.

Looking at it through the lens of replacing passwords instead of building the absolutely highest-security system helps explain why they're not limited to device-bound anymore.

[–] [email protected] 2 points 1 month ago (1 children)

Well, nothing is stopping you to keep passkeys only in one place, why force others to do what you like? Now we have options and less friction to switch to a competitor. Which results in more competition and that results in better products. Well theoretically..

[–] [email protected] 1 points 1 month ago* (last edited 1 month ago) (1 children)

I just don't think synced passkeys should be the default for example iOS.

What Microsoft is doing with device-bound passkeys using Windows Hello is imo great.

[–] [email protected] 1 points 1 month ago (1 children)

So microsoft does not require that you backup your passkeys? I thought that was the norm in all OS 😅

I think that passkeys are backed up in cloud by default isn’t that bad for the average person, since they are likely not understanding passkeys (at least right now) and don’t get that they loose access to accounts, if they disable oldscool Passwords only use one passkey on one device for that account.

[–] [email protected] 1 points 1 month ago (1 children)

You usually don't lose access though. Passkeys rarely replace passwords so you could still use your password or reset it if you don't remember it.

[–] [email protected] 1 points 1 month ago

That is, because we are in transition phase, the goal is that passkey replace the less secure method, else you gain only a very little more security than only Password .

load more comments
view more: next ›