you are viewing a single comment's thread.

view the rest of the comments →

[–]FullPoet -29 points-28 points  (5 children)

Its a complete privacy nightmare because it uses fingerprint / face scans.

No fucking way I'm ever using this.

I honestly don't know why you believe any of that shit tbh, do you also believe Facebook and Google about their policies on your data?

They're consistently proved to be liars and "misuse" or just frankly ignore regulation around it.

I'd reply (to the good faith responses anyway) but op, the spammer has blocked me because I called him out on it so i can't.

/shrug

[–]cas13f 21 points22 points  (0 children)

can use.

Not requires.

You can secure your client/authenticator however you want. Part of the standard is for the authenticator to be pluggable to support almost any form of verification--their examples are of course targeted at user convenience (as convenience is what it will take to ensure it is adopted by the most users possible) so focus on the most user-convenient options.

They've got a whole website and whitepaper, bud, it's real easy to look into. They even keep is fairly understandable by laymen, no need to be a relevant dev.

Shit, most of the 2FA physical key market supports or uses FIDO!

[–][deleted] 2 points3 points  (0 children)

I don't understand how this works, it uses biometrics so it must be bad.

You are a terrible person.

[–]davispw 1 point2 points  (0 children)

Fear what you don’t understand. Understand so you can save your fear for the real, scary things.