16 ms·

YubiKey 5 Series with New NFC and FIDO2 Passwordless Features

277 points by ofrzeta 8y ago

Leace 8y ago
Wow, this looks really cool. Yubikey 4 lacked NFC support so with 5 it's easy to use the same key via USB-A (laptop) and NFC (via OpenKeychain on Android). It appears that RSA 4096 keys can be used via NFC, no other NFC-capable keys have this. One issue is that the algorithms did not change compared to 4. No ed25519, probably due to no tamper-resistant parts with this on the market.
- georgyo 8y ago
  Also the highest ECC is still p384 and does not support p521. However it is still really nice that it support rsa 4096 over NFC now.
  - mtgx 8y ago
    I'd rather they support X25519 and X448 anyway.
    - watersb 8y ago
      Maybe their FIPS-140 certification prioritized the NIST curves? (speculation)
pibefision 8y ago
I look forward for a more robust and durable hardware design. Maybe a ruggerized version?
- Operyl 8y ago
  Have you ever used a YubiKey? Those things are beasts, I’ve yet to destroy one during my use and I am not a careful user.
- georgyo 8y ago
  I don't know how much more ruggerized you need it. It's already pretty dam strong. I've had a neo on my keys for years and it shows no sign of ware. They already are water proof and can be run over by a car. So unless you want to take a hammer to it, it should be rugged enough.
  - chimeracoder 8y ago
    > I don't know how much more ruggerized you need it. It's already pretty dam strong. I've had a neo on my keys for years and it shows no sign of ware. The first batch of the 4Cs were notoriously fragile. The plastic would break within a few months of normal use.
    - georgyo 8y ago
      I was unaware, but I guess that sorta makes sense. I have only done with USB A style, which is an Epoxied PCB which makes it fairly hard to break. USB C has a connector that cannot just be the PCB, and so it needs a housing and such.
      - chimeracoder 8y ago
        > I was unaware, but I guess that sorta makes sense. I have only done with USB A style, which is an Epoxied PCB which makes it fairly hard to break. USB C has a connector that cannot just be the PCB, and so it needs a housing and such. The Yubikey 4C nano is hardier than the original Yubikey 4Cs were. I've had mine in for months, and it hasn't broken. That said, I should note that my laptop (Macbook Pro) also decided to provide insane amounts of power to the USB-C ports on the left side, which fried the Yubikey - literally, there was smoke - and melted the plastic. (That's definitely Apple's fault, though, not Yubikey's fault).
  - mtgx 8y ago
    I'd be more concerned about general reliability. How long will these last? Because I think they should last at a minimum 10 years. If you only use one for an account, and it breaks on you, you're screwed. So I would use at least 2, but hopefully websites will allow this, and that will probably be the largest bottleneck in the future. I couldn't care less about "SMS backups" or such nonsense, as that completely defeats the point of using a hardware token. Your account will only be as secure as your phone number is.
- waldfee 8y ago
  I've had my yubikey 4 nano for a year now. I have it on my keychain and it has weathered much abuse. it has a few scratches but that's about it. it's a very durable thing
lambada 8y ago
Flicking between the comparison tables at https://www.yubico.com/products/yubikey-hardware/compare-yubikeys/ https://www.yubico.com/products/yubikey-hardware/compare-yub... and https://www.yubico.com/products/yubikey-hardware/compare-yubikey-4-neo/ https://www.yubico.com/products/yubikey-hardware/compare-yub... it appears like the only differences between YubiKey 4 and Yubikey 5 NFC is i) the addition of NFC and ii) the addition of FIDO 2 support The differences between Yubikey NEO and YubiKey 5 NFC appear to be i) The addition of docker login support (?!); ii) FIDO 2; iii) RSA 4096 (PGP) support and iv) ECC p384 (not in PGP) support. With that in mind.... how widely is FIDO2 deployed? I haven't yet found a two factor app supporting app/site that doesn't support my Yubikey 4.
- arusahni 8y ago
  IIRC the NEO only does TOTP over NFC. It sounds like the 5 does U2F over NFC, now?
  - lambada 8y ago
    Oh, interesting! That's not called out on their comparison chart for the NEO. That would certainly be a tempting upgrade for any NEO users then
    - anilakar 8y ago
      Now I've only got one problem remaining: how do I upgrade my old U2F-capable NEO on all the websites? Do I have to keep it with me ad infinitum? I cannot really destroy it either, as I cannot be 100 % sure I've remembered to enroll my new Yubikey 5. This raises a more generic question: What's the proper upgrade path for hardware authentication tokens?
      - albuic 8y ago
        > This raises a more generic question: What's the proper upgrade path for hardware authentication tokens? This is the reason why I'm still using only a password manager. I agree that a hardware token more security but the lost/stolen/change key problem is really not easy right now. I hope there will be a new common API to change all enrollment you have done but it seems hard as the key don't even know them. Maybe in a future version ?
theli0nheart 8y ago
This is fantastic! I'm super psyched about this. > Works on Microsoft Windows, macOS, Linux and on major browsers such as Chrome, Firefox, Safari, Edge, and Opera [1] I looked everywhere for documentation of Safari support but came up empty-handed. Does anyone know where this is documented? I've been waiting for this since forever. [1]: https://www.yubico.com/product/yubikey-5-nfc/ https://www.yubico.com/product/yubikey-5-nfc/
- baldfat 8y ago
  It should also work with Vivaldi (From the makers of Opera) and tries to make a more modern Opera 12. Vivaldi uses chrome extensions. I still see some people using Opera and they never switched to Vivaldi.
  - theli0nheart 8y ago
    That happens to be the very browser I'm using now, but Vivaldi support doesn't surprise me, given that it's built on Chromium. I love Safari and will continue to use it every day, but the previous (?) lack of U2F support was (is?) a drag.
- tstevens 8y ago
  Looks like Webauthn support is being added to Safari. https://bugs.webkit.org/show_bug.cgi?id=181943 https://bugs.webkit.org/show_bug.cgi?id=181943
  - theli0nheart 8y ago
    Great find, thank you! This is exactly what I was looking for. Weird that it's nowhere to be found in the Safari 12 release notes.
    - tstevens 8y ago
      I don't believe support is in 12, I think it will be coming in a future release.
vader1 8y ago
The difference between WebAuthn and U2F isn't really clear to me, but I hope the older generations will continue to work with common browser's FIDO2 implementations for a long time to come. YubiKeys are great, but too expensive to replace on a whim every year.
- StavrosK 8y ago
  U2F can only be used as a second factor. FIDO2 can be used as a replacement for a username/password, so you can go to a site, insert your FIDO2 key and log in without any other information. Old Yubikeys only support U2F, and there's a Yubico FIDO2 key. Browser support isn't there yet, I've been trying to write a Django library for it but no browser will support the complete FIDO2 flow as far as I know.
  - vader1 8y ago
    Ah, that's perfect. A hardware token as the /only/ factor sounds like a bridge too far anyhow.
    - StavrosK 8y ago
      I don't know, it sounds perfect to me.
    - emlun 8y ago
      It's a hardware token that supports a local PIN as a second factor.
  - Leace 8y ago
    > FIDO2 can be used as a replacement for a username/password, so you can go to a site, insert your FIDO2 key and log in without any other information. Technically U2F can be used to design passwordless scheme too (returning a big array of all key handles known to a service) but FIDO2 probably has some optimizations in this area.
  - lvh 8y ago
    > U2F can only be used as a second factor. I mean, certificationally, sure. But what prevents a website from trusting you to input your identifier (user name or e-mail address) and then accepting a U2F signed blob as your only credential?
cflee 8y ago
Technical Manual at https://support.yubico.com/support/solutions/articles/15000014219-yubikey-5-series-technical-manual https://support.yubico.com/support/solutions/articles/150000...: > Like FIDO U2F, the FIDO2 standard offers the same high level of security, as it is based on public key cryptography. In addition to providing unphishable two-factor authentication, the FIDO2 application on the YubiKey allows for the storage of resident credentials. As the resident credentials can store the username and other data, this allows for truly passwordless authentication. YubiKey 5 Series devices can hold up to 25 resident keys. If RSA keys are used, there is a maximum of three RSA with the rest being ECC. I wonder what the user experience will be like at 25 resident keys, they mention that the YubiKey Manager (ykman) can set/change FIDO2 PIN and reset FIDO entirely, but nothing about managing individual resident keys/credentials. It seems like it might be a bit challenging to manage this, especially if end-users accidentally register the authenticator multiple times or run out of the 25 slots for some other reason, and be told that they need to reset the whole authenticator and do recovery for all their sites...
- GoMonad 8y ago
  My understanding is that for udf / fido2 authentication, keys are not stored but rather regenerated with an HMAC https://developers.yubico.com/U2F/Protocol_details/Key_generation.html https://developers.yubico.com/U2F/Protocol_details/Key_gener... I'm curious what these resident keys are for.
  - lvh 8y ago
    The spec doesn't insist on it, but that's how Yubico devices do it, yes. It's the straightforward thing to do when your scheme eventually relies on ECDH and there's an obvious and performant way to go from a base secret to a specific-use secret (via a KDF, here HMAC) to a public key (via scalarmult). It'd be less straightforward if your key generation is expensive and complicated.
    - GoMonad 8y ago
      If I'm understand correctly, the resident keys can be used in the case of a non-ECDH scheme and otherwise they wouldn't be used? How flexible is the FIDO2 specification on crypto schemes?
village-idiot 8y ago
I’ve always been fascinated by these, but never had a justifiable reason to get one. The only use I could think of was protecting my LastPass account, but I figured my main risk there is their security getting breached, which Yubico wouldn’t help with.
- kasey_junk 8y ago
  Github and google support u2f. If you are a gmail user you should get a u2f device to protect your email. That said the cheaper yubi do this as well. I use my yubi 4 for securing my ssh key as well though this is a) a pain & b) likely theater.
  - village-idiot 8y ago
    I use an app based 2FA for that. Maybe I’ll look into a YubiKey though. My problem is that I’m halfway in my own personal transition from USB A to USB C
    - martinwww 8y ago
      I wish you successful personal transition, why you skipped USB B ?
      - village-idiot 8y ago
        Because host machines don’t have USB B connectors, you typically only see them on hubs and printers.
    - Latty 8y ago
      App based 2FA is still more vulnerable to phishing than a U2F key, because it relies on the user to check they are entering the code into the right website. It's also faster and easier (no pulling out your phone, getting a code, typing it in, just touch the key). Plus, the keys have other features (GPG keys, etc...) which can be useful.
walkingolof 8y ago
Honest question, what happens when you lose one of these ?
- fabian2k 8y ago
  You should have backup 2FA methods for that case, either more tokens at different locations or other 2FA methods like TOTP or printed one-time backup codes or all of these together.
  - lallysingh 8y ago
    I say take a morning and print out all your one-time recovery keys, put them in an envelope, and put that envelope next to your other important but rarely used documents.
    - saryant 8y ago
      Then buy a fireproof document safe and put all those documents in there.
      - zjs 8y ago
        Off topic: I feel like a fireproof document safe is something that I should own, but every time I shop for one I find myself going down a rabbit hole of unfamiliar terminology and certifications. As with many things, it seems like the marketing for such safes doesn't always match the fine print. (And sometime the fine print just seems impractical: I'm unlikely to actually air out my safe for 30 minutes each week, but could replace a desiccant a few times a year.) Does anyone have a recommendation for a safe that can protect paper documents and digital media from both fire and water in realistic conditions?
        diggernet 8y ago
        I don't have a specific recommendation, but suggest you don't try to combine the paper and digital requirements. Look for UL fire endurance ratings. UL rates them on time and temperature. Edit: I've seen ratings up to 3 hours, but the longer the time, the bulkier and heavier for the same storage volume. For paper, you'd want something rated to stay below 350 degrees for at least an hour. That's not hard to find even in large sizes. I ended up with a used FireKing 4 drawer file cabinet from a company liquidation sale. Edit: Built like a tank, holds a lot, uses a Medeco key, weighs a couple hundred pounds empty. For digital, you need something rated to stay below 125 degrees. That's pretty hard to find, and usually only in very small boxes. Unfortunately, some companies (looking at you, Sentry) like to advertise "digital media" boxes which are not rated for 125 when you read the fine print. Not sure how they get away with that. :( I eventually found a small Sentry chest rated for 125 degrees for 30 minutes. Holds a couple hard drives and some DVDs. Sadly, do not recall the model number. Edit: Storage volume is maybe 5"x5"x8", walls are all 3-4" thick.
m-p-3 8y ago
Glad they brought back NFC, I had to choose between NFC (Yubikey Neo) or 4096 PGP keys (Yubikey 4). I went with the 4.
- Snawoot 8y ago
  I had same dilemma. I hope one day I'll be capable to read securely encrypted emails on my phone.
lvh 8y ago
I think the YK5's biggest problem is that the YK Neo and 4, which have been out for years, were already so good. Unless you really care about NFC at the same time as RSA-4096, I'm not sure I see a big impetus to upgrade. Hopefully the USB-C line won't be plagued with supply issues. WebAuthn is mostly boring and I think that's mostly a good thing. I'm glad that there's a way to evolve the spec. Some of the changes are arguably improvements; I could see how Direct Anonymous Attestation is better than the old certificate method. On the other hand, that's more exciting crypto than I want to see in W3C specs. But the vast majority of deployments don't care about attestation at all: they just care that you can register a specific U2F key once (say, during employee onboarding), and then you never have to care about attestation again. So other than crypto-nerdery, I'm going to choose not to care much about (EC)DAA. U2F keys already do WebAuthn (individual sites doing bogus feature detection notwithstanding). Despite the name, at the end of the day U2F is just a way to sign some stuff so that it can't be replayed and you can't get phished. If you really wanted to use it as a single factor, you could. I'm not sold that the integration of e.g. the browser's password manager into WebAuthn is super valuable, but I'm still happily monitoring what they come up with. That is not a criticism, and certainly not a deprecation. The bottom line is U2F was great, and WebAuthn not convincing me yet is not a good reason to shy away from WebAuthn. WebAuthn is still the best authentication mechanism we (realistically) have by far. Go use it.
- toomuchtodo 8y ago
  Just wanted to say thanks for these analysis blubs on HN. Whenever something security related pops up, I rest assured that you or tptacek are going to pop in and tell it how it is.
- bonestamp2 8y ago
  > Unless you really care about NFC at the same time as RSA-4096, I'm not sure I see a big impetus to upgrade Agreed, it looks more like the new keys main draw is feature consistency across the whole YK5 line. You can now select the form factor you want and, aside from NFC, it has the same features as the other form factors. With YK4, there was not nearly the same feature parity across form factors.
- Snawoot 8y ago
nikanj 8y ago
I have an iPhone and a Macbook. It's frustrating that I have to choose between USB-C support for the Macbook, and NFC support for the phone. It's odd that they don't make a USB-C version with NFC.
- Alex3917 8y ago
  The 5C nano is designed to be plugged in the all the time though, so in that scenario what do you really gain from NFC?
  - lvh 8y ago
    Because one day we'd like to securely authenticate to things on phones in phone browsers. (I agree that it's not a big a deal as one may think; it only matters if you're logging in to a critical service via the browser and not the app. If you're using the app, it's the app's problem to make sure that you're talking to the Correct Service(TM), so phishing concerns go away.)
    - scient 8y ago
      BLE solutions are going to work much better for mobile devices than NFC I think. Google already supports it for their apps via SmartLock and Advanced Protection on both major mobile platforms. Its the browsers, and namely Safari, thats being the blocker on iOS right now - both for NFC and BLE solutions.
      - lvh 8y ago
        It works in iOS Chrome but only on Google properties. I agree Safari is a problem, I’m not sure it’s the only pinch point. They managed to glue it all together with app links and URL schemes. (Chrome on iOS works fine with Krypton on the same phone, effectively giving me the SEP U2F I want, just with gross UX.)
      - Boulth 8y ago
        > BLE solutions are going to work much better for mobile devices than NFC I think Yubico would disagree. According to their research studies BLE devices are harder to use and less robust. Source: https://www.yubico.com/2016/06/yubikey-u2f-tracking-bluetooth-maturity/ https://www.yubico.com/2016/06/yubikey-u2f-tracking-bluetoot...
Latty 8y ago
It is annoying you have to choose between USB-C and NFC. I was really hoping I could have both in a new device. I have a 4C and think it is great - the only downside is the lack of NFC and that only a subset of sites support it, but more are implementing it as time goes on. I'll probably pick up a 5 as one to store on a keyring for mostly NFC use.
- ecesena 8y ago
  Just replied in another thread: it's a few months away, but we'll have usb-c + nfc in Solo (open source security key supporting FIDO2). We'll launch the Kickstarter next week: https://solokeys.com https://solokeys.com
  - edgan 8y ago
    Will it have all the features of a Yubikey? I have two YubiKeys right now. One with NFC and one USB-C. I would love to just have one, and open source is a plus. I also use the NFC one for 2FA code storage. I then can use my laptop or phone to retrieve a code.
    - ecesena 8y ago
      Not at the beginning. We're starting FIDO2/U2F only, but we'll have the possibility to upgrade the firmware. PGP/SSH are the top feature requests, TOTP we'll have to look into it, if the way yubikeys are doing it is open, we're happy to be compatible.
  - LyndsySimon 8y ago
    Interesting. This solves about half of my problems. I use four devices regularly: a Windows desktop with USB, an MBP with USB-C, a 6th Gen iPad (Lightning), and an iPhone X (Lightning + NFC). What I'd really like to see is a small device that lets me use USB, USB-C, Lightning, or NFC with the same token without a handful of dongles to deal with. I get how difficult that is, but I've yet to see anything that supports more than one physical standard. Even USB and USB-C in the same device would solve most of my problem, leaving only my iPad to deal with a dongle due to its lack of NFC.
kevin_b_er 8y ago
We'll see. There was barely any uptake of FIDO U2F on the web. Sure there were a few major players, like google, but pretty much nothing financial for the public have taken up anything but insecure SMS/call authentication. Meanwhile telcos are working hard to convince the public they should all throw in with their insecure telecos accounts as a chain of trust after time and time again showing that your telco account is trivial to steal. Not convinced on FIDO2, either. It means you need TWO of these devices. One as a backup and another as the common case. Why? Because if you lose a single physical key, you'd have to recover your account. Recovering your account will probably end up being insecure SMS auth or easily socially engineered below-US-min-wage outsourced phone support.
- lvh 8y ago
  Some actors doing unsafe things should not preclude us from building safe things in the mean while. Google/GSuite accounts matter. GitHub accounts matter.
  - kevin_b_er 8y ago
    The problem is that if poor solutions as far as usability are present, you'll have the telecos win. This is a race against Mobile Authentication Taskforce and their fundamentally insecure accounts. If the solution can't beat them, it'll get trampled. Those other "unsafe actors" are trying to completely take over authentication, meanwhile you need 2 $50 hardware security keys at a minimum to safely use this tech. This will lose on consumer pricing and consumer uptake to the insecure Mobile Authentication Taskforce and you won't GET the option to use a FIDO2, because you'll have the choice of insecure mobile auth or nothing. You have to win against the public or they'll be suckered by bad and insecure authentication that is easier to use, and the things you want to use will be insecure anyways.
    - tialaramex 8y ago
      You don't need $50 products. You especially don't need two of them. Yubico already make a Security Key that isn't also a PGP key store, a TOTP authenticator, bagel toaster and whatever else for about $20. And there are cheaper vendors if price is the main concern.
nikolay 8y ago
Just to warn you - although you can put Yubikey 5C on a keychain, it's not robust, and the plastic disintegrates after light use in just months. I had two that got destroyed. Unlike the USB-A, which are highly resilient to wear, the USB-C version are greatly subpar! Given how expensive this is and how important is, it's highly disappointing that they didn't put more thought into the material selection process! Or maybe that was the main idea - make you buy a new key every year.
- eldridgea 8y ago
  Just so you know - I had the same problem but emailed Yubico recently and they said they made some changes because of this defect and sent me a new one for free. It's been at least 2 months and there's been no degradation like my first one.
  - nikolay 8y ago
    Thanks for the info! I'm glad that fixed this. I will reach out to them today as I migrated off the old key long ago. If they replace it, I will give it to my 10-year-old son, who uses my old keys. :)
Ajedi32 8y ago
Isn't WebAuthn backwards-compatible with FIDO 1? I was under the impression that it was (based on some of the things I read in the WebAuthn spec).
- ecesena 8y ago
  Yes, it. In fact most browser currently still implement U2F.
methou 8y ago
Wonder what version openpgp their applet support, current app on Yubikey 4 and prior versions doesn't support ECC.
- zyberzero 8y ago
  This doesn't do it either [0], unfortunately :( [0] https://www.yubico.com/products/yubikey-hardware/compare-yubikeys/ https://www.yubico.com/products/yubikey-hardware/compare-yub... - "ECC applies to the smart card applet only; does not apply to the OpenPGP applet. ECC P256 is the key type generated for the U2F keypair."
nogridbag 8y ago
I'm a LastPass user using Yubikey nanos for both my work and home PCs. But I would like to purchase a Windows 2-in-1 that only has a single USB-C port used for charging and thus a nano wouldn't really work out well. Since Yubikeys, including these latest 5 series, do not support bluetooth, most Windows laptops don't support NFC, and LastPass does not support FIDO/U2F (so Google's Titan bluetooth won't work), is my only option to unplug the charger, plug in the USB-C Yubikey, and plug the charger back in every time I want to log into LastPass? I'm kind of an end user with this sort of stuff...
- sbr464 8y ago
  LastPass Enterprise supports Duo, which then allows you to use FIDO/UTF there if you enable in the DUO admin panel.
  - lstamour 8y ago
    I tried the Duo integration and I’m not a fan. It didn’t let me set up more than one key and it wasn’t as easy to use as Google’s Smart Key app/Chrome integration. I disliked Duo integration so much it had me searching for alternatives to LastPass though everyone else uses Duo too.
  - lrvick 8y ago
    SMS as a 2FA method can't be disabled for Duo administrators. Sim takeover or GSM sniffing attacks can take over the whole account. Mentioned this to their support many times. They don't care.
    - sbr464 8y ago
      Interesting, didn’t know that
nikolay 8y ago
I just tried to order one. My credit card got charged twice as I attempted twice, got errors on their website, and the customer service rep Rachel in the online chat is behaving highly unprofessionally. My other attempts with another card were flagged as a possible fraud - obviously, their reputation among the credit card processors is not stellar. I think I'm done with Yubico and will be waiting for my Titan key from Google and consider the open-source SoloKeys as well. I think I've invested enough money in Yubico and what I'm getting back is not enough to justify the costs of this luxury. Their shortsightedness not to offer NFC on the USB-C version and to make the 4C/5C Nano so extremely hard to pull out is a clear sign they no longer are a good choice. And for quite some time, they haven't been the only choice either.
TACIXAT 8y ago
Could a username + U2F token be used as authentication?
- emlun 8y ago
  If the server allows it, sure.
hsivonen 8y ago
Is there an "explain like I'm 5" intro to FIDO2 that explains how FIDO2 as the single factor is more secure than the user entering username (not password) and then using a CTAP1 token? (Also, how do you log in to multiple accounts on the same service with FIDO2?) How many usernames can a Yubikey 5 remember in the FIDO2 mode? CTAP1 requires no storage beyond a token-wide counter.
cmurf 8y ago
How many e.g. gmail accounts can be supported on a single key? I've got probably five gmail accounts.
- emlun 8y ago
  Unlimited! Except for passwordless credentials, which do consume storage space aboard the device. But second factor (U2F style) credentials are stored encrypted on the server, so there's unlimited "space" for them.

277 points by ofrzeta 8y ago

Wow, this looks really cool. Yubikey 4 lacked NFC support so with 5 it's easy to use the same key via USB-A (laptop) and NFC (via OpenKeychain on Android). It appears that RSA 4096 keys can be used via NFC, no other NFC-capable keys have this. One issue is that the algorithms did not change compared to 4. No ed25519, probably due to no tamper-resistant parts with this on the market.

georgyo 8y ago
Also the highest ECC is still p384 and does not support p521. However it is still really nice that it support rsa 4096 over NFC now.
- mtgx 8y ago
  I'd rather they support X25519 and X448 anyway.
  - watersb 8y ago
    Maybe their FIPS-140 certification prioritized the NIST curves? (speculation)

pibefision 8y ago

I look forward for a more robust and durable hardware design. Maybe a ruggerized version?

Operyl 8y ago
Have you ever used a YubiKey? Those things are beasts, I’ve yet to destroy one during my use and I am not a careful user.
georgyo 8y ago
I don't know how much more ruggerized you need it. It's already pretty dam strong. I've had a neo on my keys for years and it shows no sign of ware. They already are water proof and can be run over by a car. So unless you want to take a hammer to it, it should be rugged enough.
- chimeracoder 8y ago
  > I don't know how much more ruggerized you need it. It's already pretty dam strong. I've had a neo on my keys for years and it shows no sign of ware. The first batch of the 4Cs were notoriously fragile. The plastic would break within a few months of normal use.
  - georgyo 8y ago
    I was unaware, but I guess that sorta makes sense. I have only done with USB A style, which is an Epoxied PCB which makes it fairly hard to break. USB C has a connector that cannot just be the PCB, and so it needs a housing and such.
    - chimeracoder 8y ago
      > I was unaware, but I guess that sorta makes sense. I have only done with USB A style, which is an Epoxied PCB which makes it fairly hard to break. USB C has a connector that cannot just be the PCB, and so it needs a housing and such. The Yubikey 4C nano is hardier than the original Yubikey 4Cs were. I've had mine in for months, and it hasn't broken. That said, I should note that my laptop (Macbook Pro) also decided to provide insane amounts of power to the USB-C ports on the left side, which fried the Yubikey - literally, there was smoke - and melted the plastic. (That's definitely Apple's fault, though, not Yubikey's fault).
- mtgx 8y ago
  I'd be more concerned about general reliability. How long will these last? Because I think they should last at a minimum 10 years. If you only use one for an account, and it breaks on you, you're screwed. So I would use at least 2, but hopefully websites will allow this, and that will probably be the largest bottleneck in the future. I couldn't care less about "SMS backups" or such nonsense, as that completely defeats the point of using a hardware token. Your account will only be as secure as your phone number is.
waldfee 8y ago
I've had my yubikey 4 nano for a year now. I have it on my keychain and it has weathered much abuse. it has a few scratches but that's about it. it's a very durable thing

lambada 8y ago

Flicking between the comparison tables at https://www.yubico.com/products/yubikey-hardware/compare-yubikeys/ https://www.yubico.com/products/yubikey-hardware/compare-yub... and https://www.yubico.com/products/yubikey-hardware/compare-yubikey-4-neo/ https://www.yubico.com/products/yubikey-hardware/compare-yub... it appears like the only differences between YubiKey 4 and Yubikey 5 NFC is i) the addition of NFC and ii) the addition of FIDO 2 support The differences between Yubikey NEO and YubiKey 5 NFC appear to be i) The addition of docker login support (?!); ii) FIDO 2; iii) RSA 4096 (PGP) support and iv) ECC p384 (not in PGP) support. With that in mind.... how widely is FIDO2 deployed? I haven't yet found a two factor app supporting app/site that doesn't support my Yubikey 4.

arusahni 8y ago
IIRC the NEO only does TOTP over NFC. It sounds like the 5 does U2F over NFC, now?
- lambada 8y ago
  Oh, interesting! That's not called out on their comparison chart for the NEO. That would certainly be a tempting upgrade for any NEO users then
  - anilakar 8y ago
    Now I've only got one problem remaining: how do I upgrade my old U2F-capable NEO on all the websites? Do I have to keep it with me ad infinitum? I cannot really destroy it either, as I cannot be 100 % sure I've remembered to enroll my new Yubikey 5. This raises a more generic question: What's the proper upgrade path for hardware authentication tokens?
    - albuic 8y ago
      > This raises a more generic question: What's the proper upgrade path for hardware authentication tokens? This is the reason why I'm still using only a password manager. I agree that a hardware token more security but the lost/stolen/change key problem is really not easy right now. I hope there will be a new common API to change all enrollment you have done but it seems hard as the key don't even know them. Maybe in a future version ?

theli0nheart 8y ago

This is fantastic! I'm super psyched about this. > Works on Microsoft Windows, macOS, Linux and on major browsers such as Chrome, Firefox, Safari, Edge, and Opera [1] I looked everywhere for documentation of Safari support but came up empty-handed. Does anyone know where this is documented? I've been waiting for this since forever. [1]: https://www.yubico.com/product/yubikey-5-nfc/ https://www.yubico.com/product/yubikey-5-nfc/

baldfat 8y ago
It should also work with Vivaldi (From the makers of Opera) and tries to make a more modern Opera 12. Vivaldi uses chrome extensions. I still see some people using Opera and they never switched to Vivaldi.
- theli0nheart 8y ago
  That happens to be the very browser I'm using now, but Vivaldi support doesn't surprise me, given that it's built on Chromium. I love Safari and will continue to use it every day, but the previous (?) lack of U2F support was (is?) a drag.
tstevens 8y ago
Looks like Webauthn support is being added to Safari. https://bugs.webkit.org/show_bug.cgi?id=181943 https://bugs.webkit.org/show_bug.cgi?id=181943
- theli0nheart 8y ago
  Great find, thank you! This is exactly what I was looking for. Weird that it's nowhere to be found in the Safari 12 release notes.
  - tstevens 8y ago
    I don't believe support is in 12, I think it will be coming in a future release.

vader1 8y ago

The difference between WebAuthn and U2F isn't really clear to me, but I hope the older generations will continue to work with common browser's FIDO2 implementations for a long time to come. YubiKeys are great, but too expensive to replace on a whim every year.

StavrosK 8y ago
U2F can only be used as a second factor. FIDO2 can be used as a replacement for a username/password, so you can go to a site, insert your FIDO2 key and log in without any other information. Old Yubikeys only support U2F, and there's a Yubico FIDO2 key. Browser support isn't there yet, I've been trying to write a Django library for it but no browser will support the complete FIDO2 flow as far as I know.
- vader1 8y ago
  Ah, that's perfect. A hardware token as the /only/ factor sounds like a bridge too far anyhow.
  - StavrosK 8y ago
    I don't know, it sounds perfect to me.
  - emlun 8y ago
    It's a hardware token that supports a local PIN as a second factor.
- Leace 8y ago
  > FIDO2 can be used as a replacement for a username/password, so you can go to a site, insert your FIDO2 key and log in without any other information. Technically U2F can be used to design passwordless scheme too (returning a big array of all key handles known to a service) but FIDO2 probably has some optimizations in this area.
- lvh 8y ago
  > U2F can only be used as a second factor. I mean, certificationally, sure. But what prevents a website from trusting you to input your identifier (user name or e-mail address) and then accepting a U2F signed blob as your only credential?

cflee 8y ago

Technical Manual at https://support.yubico.com/support/solutions/articles/15000014219-yubikey-5-series-technical-manual https://support.yubico.com/support/solutions/articles/150000...: > Like FIDO U2F, the FIDO2 standard offers the same high level of security, as it is based on public key cryptography. In addition to providing unphishable two-factor authentication, the FIDO2 application on the YubiKey allows for the storage of resident credentials. As the resident credentials can store the username and other data, this allows for truly passwordless authentication. YubiKey 5 Series devices can hold up to 25 resident keys. If RSA keys are used, there is a maximum of three RSA with the rest being ECC. I wonder what the user experience will be like at 25 resident keys, they mention that the YubiKey Manager (ykman) can set/change FIDO2 PIN and reset FIDO entirely, but nothing about managing individual resident keys/credentials. It seems like it might be a bit challenging to manage this, especially if end-users accidentally register the authenticator multiple times or run out of the 25 slots for some other reason, and be told that they need to reset the whole authenticator and do recovery for all their sites...

GoMonad 8y ago
My understanding is that for udf / fido2 authentication, keys are not stored but rather regenerated with an HMAC https://developers.yubico.com/U2F/Protocol_details/Key_generation.html https://developers.yubico.com/U2F/Protocol_details/Key_gener... I'm curious what these resident keys are for.
- lvh 8y ago
  The spec doesn't insist on it, but that's how Yubico devices do it, yes. It's the straightforward thing to do when your scheme eventually relies on ECDH and there's an obvious and performant way to go from a base secret to a specific-use secret (via a KDF, here HMAC) to a public key (via scalarmult). It'd be less straightforward if your key generation is expensive and complicated.
  - GoMonad 8y ago
    If I'm understand correctly, the resident keys can be used in the case of a non-ECDH scheme and otherwise they wouldn't be used? How flexible is the FIDO2 specification on crypto schemes?

village-idiot 8y ago

I’ve always been fascinated by these, but never had a justifiable reason to get one. The only use I could think of was protecting my LastPass account, but I figured my main risk there is their security getting breached, which Yubico wouldn’t help with.

kasey_junk 8y ago
Github and google support u2f. If you are a gmail user you should get a u2f device to protect your email. That said the cheaper yubi do this as well. I use my yubi 4 for securing my ssh key as well though this is a) a pain & b) likely theater.
- village-idiot 8y ago
  I use an app based 2FA for that. Maybe I’ll look into a YubiKey though. My problem is that I’m halfway in my own personal transition from USB A to USB C
  - martinwww 8y ago
    I wish you successful personal transition, why you skipped USB B ?
    - village-idiot 8y ago
      Because host machines don’t have USB B connectors, you typically only see them on hubs and printers.
  - Latty 8y ago
    App based 2FA is still more vulnerable to phishing than a U2F key, because it relies on the user to check they are entering the code into the right website. It's also faster and easier (no pulling out your phone, getting a code, typing it in, just touch the key). Plus, the keys have other features (GPG keys, etc...) which can be useful.

walkingolof 8y ago

Honest question, what happens when you lose one of these ?

fabian2k 8y ago
You should have backup 2FA methods for that case, either more tokens at different locations or other 2FA methods like TOTP or printed one-time backup codes or all of these together.
- lallysingh 8y ago
  I say take a morning and print out all your one-time recovery keys, put them in an envelope, and put that envelope next to your other important but rarely used documents.
  - saryant 8y ago
    Then buy a fireproof document safe and put all those documents in there.
    - zjs 8y ago
      Off topic: I feel like a fireproof document safe is something that I should own, but every time I shop for one I find myself going down a rabbit hole of unfamiliar terminology and certifications. As with many things, it seems like the marketing for such safes doesn't always match the fine print. (And sometime the fine print just seems impractical: I'm unlikely to actually air out my safe for 30 minutes each week, but could replace a desiccant a few times a year.) Does anyone have a recommendation for a safe that can protect paper documents and digital media from both fire and water in realistic conditions?
      - diggernet 8y ago
        I don't have a specific recommendation, but suggest you don't try to combine the paper and digital requirements. Look for UL fire endurance ratings. UL rates them on time and temperature. Edit: I've seen ratings up to 3 hours, but the longer the time, the bulkier and heavier for the same storage volume. For paper, you'd want something rated to stay below 350 degrees for at least an hour. That's not hard to find even in large sizes. I ended up with a used FireKing 4 drawer file cabinet from a company liquidation sale. Edit: Built like a tank, holds a lot, uses a Medeco key, weighs a couple hundred pounds empty. For digital, you need something rated to stay below 125 degrees. That's pretty hard to find, and usually only in very small boxes. Unfortunately, some companies (looking at you, Sentry) like to advertise "digital media" boxes which are not rated for 125 when you read the fine print. Not sure how they get away with that. :( I eventually found a small Sentry chest rated for 125 degrees for 30 minutes. Holds a couple hard drives and some DVDs. Sadly, do not recall the model number. Edit: Storage volume is maybe 5"x5"x8", walls are all 3-4" thick.

m-p-3 8y ago

Glad they brought back NFC, I had to choose between NFC (Yubikey Neo) or 4096 PGP keys (Yubikey 4). I went with the 4.

Snawoot 8y ago
I had same dilemma. I hope one day I'll be capable to read securely encrypted emails on my phone.

lvh 8y ago

I think the YK5's biggest problem is that the YK Neo and 4, which have been out for years, were already so good. Unless you really care about NFC at the same time as RSA-4096, I'm not sure I see a big impetus to upgrade. Hopefully the USB-C line won't be plagued with supply issues. WebAuthn is mostly boring and I think that's mostly a good thing. I'm glad that there's a way to evolve the spec. Some of the changes are arguably improvements; I could see how Direct Anonymous Attestation is better than the old certificate method. On the other hand, that's more exciting crypto than I want to see in W3C specs. But the vast majority of deployments don't care about attestation at all: they just care that you can register a specific U2F key once (say, during employee onboarding), and then you never have to care about attestation again. So other than crypto-nerdery, I'm going to choose not to care much about (EC)DAA. U2F keys already do WebAuthn (individual sites doing bogus feature detection notwithstanding). Despite the name, at the end of the day U2F is just a way to sign some stuff so that it can't be replayed and you can't get phished. If you really wanted to use it as a single factor, you could. I'm not sold that the integration of e.g. the browser's password manager into WebAuthn is super valuable, but I'm still happily monitoring what they come up with. That is not a criticism, and certainly not a deprecation. The bottom line is U2F was great, and WebAuthn not convincing me yet is not a good reason to shy away from WebAuthn. WebAuthn is still the best authentication mechanism we (realistically) have by far. Go use it.

toomuchtodo 8y ago
Just wanted to say thanks for these analysis blubs on HN. Whenever something security related pops up, I rest assured that you or tptacek are going to pop in and tell it how it is.
bonestamp2 8y ago
> Unless you really care about NFC at the same time as RSA-4096, I'm not sure I see a big impetus to upgrade Agreed, it looks more like the new keys main draw is feature consistency across the whole YK5 line. You can now select the form factor you want and, aside from NFC, it has the same features as the other form factors. With YK4, there was not nearly the same feature parity across form factors.
Snawoot 8y ago

nikanj 8y ago

I have an iPhone and a Macbook. It's frustrating that I have to choose between USB-C support for the Macbook, and NFC support for the phone. It's odd that they don't make a USB-C version with NFC.

Alex3917 8y ago
The 5C nano is designed to be plugged in the all the time though, so in that scenario what do you really gain from NFC?
- lvh 8y ago
  Because one day we'd like to securely authenticate to things on phones in phone browsers. (I agree that it's not a big a deal as one may think; it only matters if you're logging in to a critical service via the browser and not the app. If you're using the app, it's the app's problem to make sure that you're talking to the Correct Service(TM), so phishing concerns go away.)
  - scient 8y ago
    BLE solutions are going to work much better for mobile devices than NFC I think. Google already supports it for their apps via SmartLock and Advanced Protection on both major mobile platforms. Its the browsers, and namely Safari, thats being the blocker on iOS right now - both for NFC and BLE solutions.
    - lvh 8y ago
      It works in iOS Chrome but only on Google properties. I agree Safari is a problem, I’m not sure it’s the only pinch point. They managed to glue it all together with app links and URL schemes. (Chrome on iOS works fine with Krypton on the same phone, effectively giving me the SEP U2F I want, just with gross UX.)
    - Boulth 8y ago
      > BLE solutions are going to work much better for mobile devices than NFC I think Yubico would disagree. According to their research studies BLE devices are harder to use and less robust. Source: https://www.yubico.com/2016/06/yubikey-u2f-tracking-bluetooth-maturity/ https://www.yubico.com/2016/06/yubikey-u2f-tracking-bluetoot...

Latty 8y ago

It is annoying you have to choose between USB-C and NFC. I was really hoping I could have both in a new device. I have a 4C and think it is great - the only downside is the lack of NFC and that only a subset of sites support it, but more are implementing it as time goes on. I'll probably pick up a 5 as one to store on a keyring for mostly NFC use.

ecesena 8y ago
Just replied in another thread: it's a few months away, but we'll have usb-c + nfc in Solo (open source security key supporting FIDO2). We'll launch the Kickstarter next week: https://solokeys.com https://solokeys.com
- edgan 8y ago
  Will it have all the features of a Yubikey? I have two YubiKeys right now. One with NFC and one USB-C. I would love to just have one, and open source is a plus. I also use the NFC one for 2FA code storage. I then can use my laptop or phone to retrieve a code.
  - ecesena 8y ago
    Not at the beginning. We're starting FIDO2/U2F only, but we'll have the possibility to upgrade the firmware. PGP/SSH are the top feature requests, TOTP we'll have to look into it, if the way yubikeys are doing it is open, we're happy to be compatible.
- LyndsySimon 8y ago
  Interesting. This solves about half of my problems. I use four devices regularly: a Windows desktop with USB, an MBP with USB-C, a 6th Gen iPad (Lightning), and an iPhone X (Lightning + NFC). What I'd really like to see is a small device that lets me use USB, USB-C, Lightning, or NFC with the same token without a handful of dongles to deal with. I get how difficult that is, but I've yet to see anything that supports more than one physical standard. Even USB and USB-C in the same device would solve most of my problem, leaving only my iPad to deal with a dongle due to its lack of NFC.

kevin_b_er 8y ago

We'll see. There was barely any uptake of FIDO U2F on the web. Sure there were a few major players, like google, but pretty much nothing financial for the public have taken up anything but insecure SMS/call authentication. Meanwhile telcos are working hard to convince the public they should all throw in with their insecure telecos accounts as a chain of trust after time and time again showing that your telco account is trivial to steal. Not convinced on FIDO2, either. It means you need TWO of these devices. One as a backup and another as the common case. Why? Because if you lose a single physical key, you'd have to recover your account. Recovering your account will probably end up being insecure SMS auth or easily socially engineered below-US-min-wage outsourced phone support.

lvh 8y ago
Some actors doing unsafe things should not preclude us from building safe things in the mean while. Google/GSuite accounts matter. GitHub accounts matter.
- kevin_b_er 8y ago
  The problem is that if poor solutions as far as usability are present, you'll have the telecos win. This is a race against Mobile Authentication Taskforce and their fundamentally insecure accounts. If the solution can't beat them, it'll get trampled. Those other "unsafe actors" are trying to completely take over authentication, meanwhile you need 2 $50 hardware security keys at a minimum to safely use this tech. This will lose on consumer pricing and consumer uptake to the insecure Mobile Authentication Taskforce and you won't GET the option to use a FIDO2, because you'll have the choice of insecure mobile auth or nothing. You have to win against the public or they'll be suckered by bad and insecure authentication that is easier to use, and the things you want to use will be insecure anyways.
  - tialaramex 8y ago
    You don't need $50 products. You especially don't need two of them. Yubico already make a Security Key that isn't also a PGP key store, a TOTP authenticator, bagel toaster and whatever else for about $20. And there are cheaper vendors if price is the main concern.

nikolay 8y ago

Just to warn you - although you can put Yubikey 5C on a keychain, it's not robust, and the plastic disintegrates after light use in just months. I had two that got destroyed. Unlike the USB-A, which are highly resilient to wear, the USB-C version are greatly subpar! Given how expensive this is and how important is, it's highly disappointing that they didn't put more thought into the material selection process! Or maybe that was the main idea - make you buy a new key every year.

eldridgea 8y ago
Just so you know - I had the same problem but emailed Yubico recently and they said they made some changes because of this defect and sent me a new one for free. It's been at least 2 months and there's been no degradation like my first one.
- nikolay 8y ago
  Thanks for the info! I'm glad that fixed this. I will reach out to them today as I migrated off the old key long ago. If they replace it, I will give it to my 10-year-old son, who uses my old keys. :)

Ajedi32 8y ago

Isn't WebAuthn backwards-compatible with FIDO 1? I was under the impression that it was (based on some of the things I read in the WebAuthn spec).

ecesena 8y ago
Yes, it. In fact most browser currently still implement U2F.

methou 8y ago

Wonder what version openpgp their applet support, current app on Yubikey 4 and prior versions doesn't support ECC.

zyberzero 8y ago
This doesn't do it either [0], unfortunately :( [0] https://www.yubico.com/products/yubikey-hardware/compare-yubikeys/ https://www.yubico.com/products/yubikey-hardware/compare-yub... - "ECC applies to the smart card applet only; does not apply to the OpenPGP applet. ECC P256 is the key type generated for the U2F keypair."

nogridbag 8y ago

I'm a LastPass user using Yubikey nanos for both my work and home PCs. But I would like to purchase a Windows 2-in-1 that only has a single USB-C port used for charging and thus a nano wouldn't really work out well. Since Yubikeys, including these latest 5 series, do not support bluetooth, most Windows laptops don't support NFC, and LastPass does not support FIDO/U2F (so Google's Titan bluetooth won't work), is my only option to unplug the charger, plug in the USB-C Yubikey, and plug the charger back in every time I want to log into LastPass? I'm kind of an end user with this sort of stuff...

sbr464 8y ago
LastPass Enterprise supports Duo, which then allows you to use FIDO/UTF there if you enable in the DUO admin panel.
- lstamour 8y ago
  I tried the Duo integration and I’m not a fan. It didn’t let me set up more than one key and it wasn’t as easy to use as Google’s Smart Key app/Chrome integration. I disliked Duo integration so much it had me searching for alternatives to LastPass though everyone else uses Duo too.
- lrvick 8y ago
  SMS as a 2FA method can't be disabled for Duo administrators. Sim takeover or GSM sniffing attacks can take over the whole account. Mentioned this to their support many times. They don't care.
  - sbr464 8y ago
    Interesting, didn’t know that

nikolay 8y ago

I just tried to order one. My credit card got charged twice as I attempted twice, got errors on their website, and the customer service rep Rachel in the online chat is behaving highly unprofessionally. My other attempts with another card were flagged as a possible fraud - obviously, their reputation among the credit card processors is not stellar. I think I'm done with Yubico and will be waiting for my Titan key from Google and consider the open-source SoloKeys as well. I think I've invested enough money in Yubico and what I'm getting back is not enough to justify the costs of this luxury. Their shortsightedness not to offer NFC on the USB-C version and to make the 4C/5C Nano so extremely hard to pull out is a clear sign they no longer are a good choice. And for quite some time, they haven't been the only choice either.

TACIXAT 8y ago

Could a username + U2F token be used as authentication?

emlun 8y ago
If the server allows it, sure.

hsivonen 8y ago

Is there an "explain like I'm 5" intro to FIDO2 that explains how FIDO2 as the single factor is more secure than the user entering username (not password) and then using a CTAP1 token? (Also, how do you log in to multiple accounts on the same service with FIDO2?) How many usernames can a Yubikey 5 remember in the FIDO2 mode? CTAP1 requires no storage beyond a token-wide counter.

cmurf 8y ago

How many e.g. gmail accounts can be supported on a single key? I've got probably five gmail accounts.

emlun 8y ago
Unlimited! Except for passwordless credentials, which do consume storage space aboard the device. But second factor (U2F style) credentials are stored encrypted on the server, so there's unlimited "space" for them.