One question I don't often see asked in regards to passkeys: what is the legal standing in regards to law enforcement access to 'passkeys' vs passwords? For ex

One question I don't often see asked in regards to passkeys: what is the legal standing in regards to law enforcement access to 'passkeys' vs passwords? For example, it is completely valid to say I genuinely do not know my 1000 long multiple special character password; it could be on a piece of paper, in a file encrypted with multiple layers. Essentially, there is no foolproof way to ever prove whether I know a given password, or not, especially if the password is only ever in my head (assuming the plaintext version is never logged, all you would ever have as 'proof' is a hash to compare it to). Passkeys make it so that, I imagine, there is an element of 'proof' at all times; your face, fingerprints (which in some countries you are required by law to provide), I can't disprove I "own" my fingers so that element is always there, and you can be compelled to provide your fingerprints at any time for any reason - with a password, it is impossible to know whether I know a password. In that sense, a password is far, far, far stronger than any other method of authentication. Take a scenario: Mr Police wants access to your phone, it's protected only by your fingerprint, pretty easy to gain access. Now do the same but with a password that's sufficiently complex, written on a now shredded piece of paper, and there is genuine plausible deniability. I imagine in a lot of cases this is extremely important and passkeys will be shunned altogether.