Comment by 201984

1 month ago

How does scanning the barcode with your phone log you into the computer? Does your phone need network access for that?

Steam does this. If I want to login, it shows a barcode I can scan with the app and it logs me in without needing to enter my login information. Phone needs internet access, doesn't need to be on the same network as the device I'm logging in on.

I assume the QR code contains a token for the device, which is used by the app to authorize the login and the server automatically logs in the client on the device with the matching token.

Seems a lot safer to me than using my login credentials on a potentially unsafe device.

There's a whole set of fallbacks built in to the standard, including Bluetooth, local network connections, and going via a relay server. All of them eventually end up with your device signing something and handing that back to the browser on the other device to complete the authentication flow.

  • Is this why I keep getting notifications that such-and-such a website wants access to devices on my local network? I've been denying those left and right lately and didn't understand what on earth they needed access to that for.

    • Android 17? If yes, then that's because they added a new permission specifically to block apps from LAN access, then bundled it together with "nearby devices" (one introduced earlier specifically to block Bluetooth and WiFi scanning and point-to-point connections) because apparently they believe the concept of "local network" is too difficult for normies to understand or something - and due to how it's implemented, even apps trying to talk via loopback with themselves get captured in scope, too. The UI won't tell you which is which, though.

  • I cannot speak to how accurate your description is, but this description sounds like there are multiple weak points and multiple attack vectors that open this up to increased risk of compromise, undermining the very security stance it's supposed to provide.

    • See my response above... I believe the description is incorrect, and bluetooth is required to prove physical proximity.

    • The spec is quite thorough and well thought out in this regard. Despite what it "sounds like" when described, it is very secure, even with a variety of implementations. What is far weaker is that most sites that offer passkeys also offer a multitude of fallback recovery options.

  • AFAIK, the "scan this QR code" method of signing in with a passkey on a phone on a device w/o the passkey requires Bluetooth. There's some type of handshaking that goes on in order for you to prove you're in physical proximity of the device you are logging in on, to prevent phishing attacks.

    • Since I might have made someone mad... to clarify, as I understand it, Bluetooth is absolutely required for this "Scan the QR code" flow to work. However, it's also possible the actual authentication traffic to travel over a different pathway (wifi, cellular), but the bluetooth part is always required though to prove proximity. So on e.g. a library computer without Bluetooth enabled, you would not be able to log in with a passkey on your phone.

      1 reply →

If you're not happy connecting your phone to the network, then how likely is it that you would you be willing to enter your login details on a machine you don't control?

  • What if you just can't have internet on your phone? Like if the computer is connected via Ethernet and there's no wifi network you can connect to? What if you're abroad and have no roaming? And the ultimate question about a person that the modern world can barely conceptualize - what if you have a dumbphone? Or what if your smartphone is lost or stolen or dead and you need to access some account? That last one has happened to me, and I sure am glad I know the key passwords that I need for survival.

    These may seem like nitpicks, but there's probably a thousand rare scenarios like these that exist. You inevitably have to consider them when you're moving from punching in letters and numbers that you remember in the normal, low-tech way to a complex networked two-device workflow.

    • I think there exists a vein of contempt for anyone not fully embracing our bold new world, so many implementers etc. get the double bonus of alienating and frustrating all of the non conformers

    • If my phone is lost or damaged, I would buy a new, cheap Android phone and sync my passkeys to it. But I am curious why one would need to login to a website in order to survive? If one did have say a severe medical condition that somehow required a website in order to manage, I guess I would concede that maybe passkeys aren't the best way to secure such a life-sustaining website.

      5 replies →

  • Poor people exist.

    • The poorest country I'm familiar with is Zambia, where about 90% of the population have a mobile subscription.

      The number of people sharing GP's concerns for reasons of poverty rather than because of their personal security posture will be vanishingly small.

      4 replies →

  • > willing to enter your login details on a machine you don't control?

    Are you talking about your phone here?

    • Sure, your personal security posture might very well preclude that.

      But, again, if you don't trust your phone then how likely is it that you will be prepared to trust a public computer?

what good is a phone if it isn't on a network?

  • > what good is a phone if it isn't on a network?

    1. It might be on a voice network but not on a data network; for instance, if you don't have a data plan.

    2. Modern smartphones are actually a hybrid of a traditional cell phone and a traditional PDA, and you might be using it for the PDA part.