> So what plans can you point me towards where Google/Apple is announcing that they're going to build a generic API for exporting passkeys from the phone? Do th

> So what plans can you point me towards where Google/Apple is announcing that they're going to build a generic API for exporting passkeys from the phone? Do they have a timeline up? I'm not privy to their priorities or timelines, no. > And no, per-login adding another device isn't sync. It's just not accurate to say that either iOS or Android are making serious progress towards portability. Their implementations are extremely locked down, and that's an important caveat that should be included in conversations about passkey portability. But other companies with a history of being open here also do not have the feature yet. I am equally non-privy to their priorities or timelines. If you want to say "passkey implementations do not have a bulk export/import feature, which makes it time consuming to switch between implementations", that is 100% factual. I would not qualify this as a "lock-in", any more a phone that needs to get its software reinstalled is "bricked". And I wouldn't take current state to imply some inherent permanent ecosystem-wide rejection of user backups and data portability, when many vendors have implementations that are still in beta. > My worry is that most of them won't, and that hardware attestation will get rid of the rest. There is a great deal of worry about hardware attestation even by the vendors you are likely most concerned about. Apple for example not only removed their attestation, but now anonymizes the authenticator via a zeroed AAGUID. No matter the vendor, their users (and the overall ecosystem) will suffer if relying parties build allow lists of acceptable authenticators, and deny all others. That said, I do suspect the ultimate goal is to have sites be able to tell if an authenticator can allow them to shortcut additional authentication checks or not. It could be those websites give a more complicated authentication process to passkeys which do not meet their physical factor requirement. >> There also hasn't been anyone yet who has tried to define what that interchange format should be. > Isn't that kind of the job of a standard body? Is it actually unreasonable for me to ask the FIDO alliance to do that? Putting aside that I can't speak as to whether there is or is not an effort underway there - It depends on the group, but proposed standards for interoperability typically need at least two implementations - two parties have to commit to actually supporting the result. Actual standards need to show way more. If passkey providers hypothetically want an interoperable interchange format or protocol, they can try to standardize it in a number of places including under FIDO Alliance. Absolutely nothing prevents someone from creating their own bespoke backup/restore process in the meantime, which could very well get adopted by others. > Maybe it would be OK for them to use something else then? We're building out an authentication format that not only has zero protections to prevent lock-in, but that includes tools to enforce lock-in (hardware attestation). And I can't help but think, maybe it's fine for the extremely limited pool of agencies that need to block backup/restore to have a custom solution that's different from what Netflix uses. I don't think this fixes your overall concern. There's no technical measure to prevent implementations from limiting backup/restore even if you make all authenticators anonymous. Likewise, I don't believe websites would choose "friendly" credentials over "strong" ones. They would let the system survive or fail based on the user feedback/complaints of "strong" mode. > At the very least, the conversation we're having now is a lot different from "oh, you can move your passkeys off of your phone." You can't, not unless you're sticking with the same vendor. Yes, the process is automated within the same ecosystem, and we (finally) have a way to use a phone to e.g. authenticate to a computer and cross ecosystems. So far there is no process to batch migrate. There _is_ a manual process to migrate. I get your desires and your concerns about users not understanding that they will have this multi-device process for migration today. I'm personally hopeful that there will be a solution here eventually to streamline switching platforms and passkey managers, once someone prioritizes it.