5 ms·
It depends what your threat model looks like. For example if you have good physical security and limit passwordless login to physically secure machines via AD
by Someone1234 9y ago
It depends what your threat model looks like.
For example if you have good physical security and limit passwordless login to physically secure machines via AD computer groups, this may protect you from remote attackers.
If however organizations allow the use of this over the internet from "any" endpoint then this completely replaces a password 1:1 and theft/loss of the Yubikey could be a major problem.
This could also be used only on a single layer of your security. For example passwordless VPN authentication but then a password/2F is required for actual user login.
- waisbrot 9y agoUnless you're asserting that the hardware token is just as crackable as a password, it's not a 1:1 replacement. The problem with passwords is that you have 10,000 users and more than one of them has a bad password. The problem with hardware tokens is that I've stolen your token. So passwords are vulnerable to bots, while the hardware token requires a human to find/steal something and connect it with a specific account.
- Someone1234 9y ago> Unless you're asserting that the hardware token is just as crackable as a password That's completely outside the scope of what I was describing. You've taken my words out of context.
- hirsin 9y agoI'd be open to hearing the right context, since I read it the same way. "Replaces PWs 1:1" is only true in the context of... the attacker only uses stolen passwords and doesn't rely on password dumps? Even in a targeted attack scenario, where the attacker would have to specifically target you to steal creds, this is better, as they'd now have to physically find you and take the key.