|
|
|
|
|
by md_
1576 days ago
|
|
It depends a lot on the situation. I think it’s reasonable, for example, for banks who have different liability standards depending on how transactions are authenticated to require batch attestation. But like I said, most consumer IdPs aren’t doing attestation checks, and it’s discouraged, so I think you’re making a big deal of it. :) |
|
If a bank feels the need to control the hardware I use, they must provide that hardware. Their needs absolutely do not entitle them to impose codesigning/bootloader-locking requirements on my other devices, such as my phone or my laptop.
> aren’t doing attestation checks, and it’s discouraged
That will change. If it weren't, they wouldn't have bothered putting it into the spec. Or they could have used symmetric cryptography for attestation, like the bank-issued token cards and the chip in your chip-and-PIN card do.