4 ms·

Or as a counterpoint: https://support.apple.com/en-au/102195#:~:text=Credential%20security,which%20uses%20public%20key%20cryptography https://support.apple.com/

Or as a counterpoint: https://support.apple.com/en-au/102195#:~:text=Credential%20security,which%20uses%20public%20key%20cryptography https://support.apple.com/en-au/102195#:~:text=Credential%20.... We are now literally arguing semantics.

lazide 3y ago
Webauthn == one way to use passkeys. Which as you note can also, optionally, request other information. Which isn’t passkeys. Which is nice, but doesn’t mean passkeys do. Their scope is more limited. Technically correct is the best kind of correct, no? As I noted, if someone wanted to build a more complex flow they can - but it would be more of a jerk move than anything probably.
- lll-o-lll 3y ago
  Passkey does not appear to be a well defined term - more a marketing term - but you cannot disconnect the concept from FIDO/WebAuthn. There is no way to use a “passkey” without using the WebAuthn protocol, and hence “User Verification” is an available option and hence it’s reasonable to assert that passkeys support MFA. So, if I am a site that needs additional verification (previously used MFA), I use “User Verification” == “required”. Then I know two factors “something the user has” and “something the user knows/is” has been used.
  - lazide 3y ago
    Except it actually is well defined, and has a specific standard of what it actually means? https://fidoalliance.org/passkeys/ https://fidoalliance.org/passkeys/ But whatever.
    - lll-o-lll 3y ago
      But you agree with the rest of my statement and therefore that you were in error?
      - lazide 3y ago
        Hahaha, you need to learn to read man. There is literally nothing you added that wasn’t already there. So no. But you’ve been very verbose in looking like an idiot though. So have fun with that?