4 ms·

I'm not sure why you couldn't associate a new key with whatever services you use, like changing a password, or even having multiple keys associated to one accou

I'm not sure why you couldn't associate a new key with whatever services you use, like changing a password, or even having multiple keys associated to one account. Also I am not sure that I would consider not being able to access private key material from a enclave vendor lock in, since that's the entire purpose of the device. I guess the same people arguing that passkey is a conspiracy are the same ones that think secure boot and TPM is a Microsofts conspiracy to prevent you from installing Linux.

deleted 3y ago
[deleted]
mastazi 3y ago
Having to regenerate all your keys just to switch client is an order of magnitude (or two) harder than migrating from one password manager to another. The article we are commenting on is titled "the beginning of the end of passwors" as if passkeys were an improvement over passwords. They are an improvement for service providers, sure, but not for users, due to vendor lock-in. This was my initial argument from the start. You kept countering with arguments such as "you can use a FOSS client", "but Google is a contributor to open source" or "Google can't access your Yubikey" - which are irrelevant to my point, which is that the new standard introduces further vendor lock-in. In addition you resorted to personal attacks - calling me and other users in this thread conspiracists or uneducated - but could not counter any of the points we were making with valid arguments.