> The only reason why Big Tech have hyped up Passkeys this much
I can't think of any other reason Big Tech (and small tech, and medium tech, government, and the list goes on) would want to eliminate passwords, an insecure concept, to replace them with a form of proof of ownership.
> [not pasting full quote because ...] "And developers and users... ― Google"
> No, they do not! - Author
Certainly, many developers hate all of the reasons outlined by the quote from the ethereal identity known as the "Google". Many users hate them for the same reason, too, but for some reason the author doesn't believe that developers or users dislike the UX, security, or liability of passwords (the Author, here, is apparently speaking for upwards of 8 billion individuals -- as one of them, I can certainly make up my own mind, thanks).
> Passkeys also makes you more vulnerable to seizures of electronics and keys.
This is why it is important for devices, like the iPhone, have a quick way of putting themselves into a 'locked, require pin/pass' mode. Or just don't enable Face ID/similar biometrics for a 'master' password.
> And when it happens to you, Google will let you know that they reserve the right to terminate your account for any reason or no reason at all.
The ethereal Google can look at you funny and decide they will lock your account without any reason. I'm not sure what makes this situation any different. People commonly use their Chrome account, or Microsoft account, etc. in conjunction with the OS/browser's password manager. With passkeys, they're effectively in a _no worse_ state than they are today. If you want to argue about backups, these are likely the same individuals who wouldn't know why you'd need a backup to begin with.
FWIW, I agree that there shouldn't be vendor lock-in with any form of identity, but there doesn't seem to be a challenger that is willing to bring something forward that eliminates both the security nightmares that are passwords as well as being highly portable with no vendor tie-in which finally, is easy to use. Big Tech found "secure" and "easy to use" which is what users are going to flock to.
I can't think of any other reason Big Tech (and small tech, and medium tech, government, and the list goes on) would want to eliminate passwords, an insecure concept, to replace them with a form of proof of ownership.
> [not pasting full quote because ...] "And developers and users... ― Google" > No, they do not! - Author
Certainly, many developers hate all of the reasons outlined by the quote from the ethereal identity known as the "Google". Many users hate them for the same reason, too, but for some reason the author doesn't believe that developers or users dislike the UX, security, or liability of passwords (the Author, here, is apparently speaking for upwards of 8 billion individuals -- as one of them, I can certainly make up my own mind, thanks).
> Passkeys also makes you more vulnerable to seizures of electronics and keys.
This is why it is important for devices, like the iPhone, have a quick way of putting themselves into a 'locked, require pin/pass' mode. Or just don't enable Face ID/similar biometrics for a 'master' password.
> And when it happens to you, Google will let you know that they reserve the right to terminate your account for any reason or no reason at all.
The ethereal Google can look at you funny and decide they will lock your account without any reason. I'm not sure what makes this situation any different. People commonly use their Chrome account, or Microsoft account, etc. in conjunction with the OS/browser's password manager. With passkeys, they're effectively in a _no worse_ state than they are today. If you want to argue about backups, these are likely the same individuals who wouldn't know why you'd need a backup to begin with.
FWIW, I agree that there shouldn't be vendor lock-in with any form of identity, but there doesn't seem to be a challenger that is willing to bring something forward that eliminates both the security nightmares that are passwords as well as being highly portable with no vendor tie-in which finally, is easy to use. Big Tech found "secure" and "easy to use" which is what users are going to flock to.