[CharlesW]

> Big tech is salivating over the vendor lock this will enable…

This enables vendor lock-in as much as passwords do. That is to say, not at all.

Example: Chrome supports passkeys, but uses a Chrome-only passkey store instead of the OS one. So I have one passkey for Chrome, and another for macOS/iOS.

[account-5]

That's literally describing vendor lock in meaning you need manage multiple vendor locked passkeys for the same service which is ridiculous.

Passkeys are massively less flexible than passwords as it stands.

[CharlesW]

> That's literally describing vendor lock in meaning you need manage multiple vendor locked passkeys for the same service which is ridiculous.

It makes more sense if you don't think of passkeys as passwords and more like "SSH keys for muggles". Passkeys are definitely not vendor-locked — they're a standard, and so Google Account passkeys work with anything that supports passkeys.

If you're unhappy that Chrome doesn't leverage the macOS passkey store, that's completely valid and you can point your frustration in their direction. In practice, taking 30 seconds to create an additional passkey wasn't onorous.

When 1Password supports passkeys, I'll generate another passkey for it and then use that globally.

[lucianbr]

> In practice, taking 30 seconds to create an additional passkey wasn't onorous.

Almost every site requires an account these days. I am quite fed up with the number of accounts I need to have, in general. Now you are telling me I have to go through a process of creating passkeys for each site for each browser/mobile os? 30 seconds times 100 is pretty onerous.

Oh, you mean you reuse the same passkey for all services that require accounts? I'm sorry to tell you, that's impossible. You didn't understand how this works.

"The same passkey is never used with more than one site." from here https://developers.google.com/identity/passkeys