To avoid being a propagandized lemming you have to have a basic understanding of what is happening...
passkeys aren't tied to Google or to any other specific provider. Note that this announcement is just about Google supporting logging to with passkeys to their platform. But you don't have to have anything to do with Google to use passkeys with other sites/apps that support them.
Disguising a proprietary development under an industry standard umbrella is a typical move from Corporate Utopia playbook. That's why it is so easy to spot when somebody tries to manipulate public opinion using social media accounts.
It would be a totally different situation if customers were actually interested in a particular solution. Otherwise, it's all astroturfing and nothing can really change that.
Also it's always a good tone to put a disclaimer, e.g. "Googler".
It's not a proprietary development. The intention to use private keys for authentication goes all the way back to the KEYGEN tag in HTML. WebAuthn started from FIDO, not Google, and FIDO Alliance was started in 2012 by PayPal, Lenovo, and others, not Google, Apple, etc. Google joined in 2013, and they were mostly interested in 2FA at that point. And prior to that, when I worked at IBM TJ Watson in the 90s on some of the first TPMs, we were developing passkey equivalents using public key crypto for login and digital signatures on ThinkPads and RS/6000 workstations.
This work, desire to use public key crypto for authentication, goes back A LONG time practically before the internet was taken over by corporations.
This is a good thing for the public. Passwords suck. The number of people who have been pwn3d and phished due to passwords is insane, they're user hostile in so many ways "It would be a totally different situation if customers were actually interested in a particular solution", are customers actually interested in constantly logging in with password and SMS codes -- the default today. Does anyone love using authenticators, or Apple 2FA popups, security keys?
> Disguising a proprietary development under an industry standard umbrella is a typical move from Corporate Utopia playbook.
OK, but is that what's going on here?
There's the suggestion in this part of the thread that somehow this all inhibits user freedom. But these objections appear to come out of complete ignorance of what is actually happening. I'm pointing it out because it's the people who are most concerned about corporate manipulation that need to understand what's happening to have any idea on how to guard against it.
> Also it's always a good tone to put a disclaimer, e.g. "Googler".
I guess you're suggesting I'm a Google shill? Well, (1) you're wrong (in fact, I got rid of all the Google things I used to use personally); (2) did I even say anything helpful to Google?
I suggest to take off the tin-foil hat of paranoia. It's not going to protect you from anything and, in fact, will make you more vulnerable if you let it cause you to focus on the wrong things.
passkeys aren't tied to Google or to any other specific provider. Note that this announcement is just about Google supporting logging to with passkeys to their platform. But you don't have to have anything to do with Google to use passkeys with other sites/apps that support them.