• Klox@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    1
    ·
    17 hours ago

    Apologies if I miss-stated your point and conflated service’s other arbitrary decisions with what you’re suggesting may happen with passkeys.

    Maybe I have one follow-up question, there are a number of websites that just don’t use passwords at all. It’s always one-time codes sent to emails. Where does this fall on your freedom spectrum?

    Do you have similar arguments about HTTP 3? QUIC? Web RTC? There’s so many protocols that could be used in a way to lock in users. Just because it has some bits in the schema, doesn’t really mean much. Particularly when it’s actually supplying a very real need in other contexts. Nobody wants 30 versions of passkey-alt protocols.

    Cheers

    • fancy_pants@reddthat.com
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      1
      ·
      edit-2
      8 hours ago

      I’ll summarize the disagreement between the two of you in one sentence: what’s good for locked down highly secure enterprise is not good for public access services.

      It’s understandable your factory has cops. We don’t wasn’t to have cops at home.

    • dropdrip@lemmy.ml
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      2
      ·
      9 hours ago

      Consumers are pent up and lashing out at passkeys. It’s wild. Like, you all still want to use the dictatorial software that is YouTube, Google and Microsoft, but passkeys are the hill to die on? lmao “No! How dare you provide cryptographic security!”