Post #1579198

2026-03-01 00:05 UTC

That's close enough for a privacy perspective. There's also limitations on domains that can request the auth, specifically ”only the one the credential is for", and there's a different key per domain and user typically. It's also implemented in a way where if the user doesn't choose to disclose their account to the service, the service can't know. Caring about privacy and caring about the details of a security protocol are distinct. You'd be surprised how many people who care about privacy are deeply wary of passkeys because of the biometric factor, which is unfortunate because the way it authenticates is a lot harder to track across domains by design. I understood they had a lot of concerns, one of which was biometrics via passkeys since GitHub was a very early adopter due to the supply chain risk they pose.

Replies (1)

@ell1e@leminal.space 2026-03-01 04:49

Passkeys seem to be advertised in ways that puts people off (edit: not saying that makes them bad): - TPMs, Secure Enclaves, etc. are deeply closed-source and security by obscurity. Until there is an open TPM implementation available, many users may prefer not to rely on them. It seems like [KeepassXC allows circumventing TPM for Passkeys](https://discuss.privacyguides.net/t/keepassxc-added-passkeys-support/17288/8), but most people probably don't know that. - Too much "trust me bro, my cloud is safe" advertising from big Passkey advocates like Google to try to get people to use their invasive services. - A classic hardware key may be indistinguishable from a normal password being entered. But Google has announced they want to push passkeys against user's wishes [here](https://safety.google/safety/authentication/passkey/): "Is opting-into passkey mandatory? No, [...]. However, over time, as users become more accustomed to passkeys, we might limit where we allow passwords to be used because they’re less secure than passkeys." Again, not a great look. - Collecting biometric data is always dangerous, too many attack vectors during processing. I'm aware that Passkeys can be used without that, but many people may be put off by that push. I think that's why Passkeys have poor adoption among privacy advocates, even though most problems seem fixable. > Caring about privacy and caring about the details of a security protocol are distinct. You’d be surprised how many people who care about privacy are deeply wary of passkeys because of the biometric factor, which is unfortunat

Open ##1579199