Re: Intent-to-Ship: Backward-Compatibility FIDO U2F support for Google Accounts

2019-06-05 Thread J.C. Jones
In short, no. I believe not implementing the facet algorithm is a feature. I recommend migrating to Web Authentication as soon as practical. I will also point to a post on blink-dev from Adam Langely calling for websites targeting Chrome to migrate to WebAuthn:

Re: Intent-to-Ship: Backward-Compatibility FIDO U2F support for Google Accounts

2019-05-22 Thread sraman--- via dev-platform
Hi all, Thank you for enabling U2F! But Duo Security's implementation of U2F is dependent on the Trusted Facet functionality, as we need to reliably enroll/authenticate a U2F credential across subdomains. Until the trusted facet functionality is implemented I don't believe we can enable our

Re: Intent-to-Ship: Backward-Compatibility FIDO U2F support for Google Accounts

2019-03-28 Thread Joseph Lorenzo Hall
Thanks for being flexible here in the face of adversity, big fan of running trains even if it seems icky in the short term. On Wed, Mar 27, 2019 at 1:00 PM JC Jones wrote: > On Tuesday, March 26, 2019 at 12:50:21 PM UTC-7, Alex Gaynor wrote: > > Simply flipping the pref, and not including

Re: Intent-to-Ship: Backward-Compatibility FIDO U2F support for Google Accounts

2019-03-27 Thread JC Jones
On Tuesday, March 26, 2019 at 12:50:21 PM UTC-7, Alex Gaynor wrote: > Simply flipping the pref, and not including register support seems a bit > unfortunate, as it'll leave some websites in a works-sometimes state. While > some larger sites have UIs and help articles explaining that Firefox works

Re: Intent-to-Ship: Backward-Compatibility FIDO U2F support for Google Accounts

2019-03-26 Thread J.C. Jones
Hi Philip: 1) Yes 2) I think so -- it's clearly had substantial refactoring in the process of moving to Web Authentication 3) I think that's the one, but most sites redistribute a much older version that used to be served by gstatic.com (I can't find it now) archived here:

Re: Intent-to-Ship: Backward-Compatibility FIDO U2F support for Google Accounts

2019-03-26 Thread Alex Gaynor
On Tue, Mar 26, 2019 at 3:46 PM J.C. Jones wrote: > (Sorry for the delay in replying, had a long-weekend of PTO there) > > On Thu, Mar 21, 2019 at 7:08 AM Henri Sivonen > wrote: > > > On Thu, Mar 14, 2019 at 8:12 PM J.C. Jones wrote: > > > It appears that if we want full security key support

Re: Intent-to-Ship: Backward-Compatibility FIDO U2F support for Google Accounts

2019-03-26 Thread J.C. Jones
(Sorry for the delay in replying, had a long-weekend of PTO there) On Thu, Mar 21, 2019 at 7:08 AM Henri Sivonen wrote: > On Thu, Mar 14, 2019 at 8:12 PM J.C. Jones wrote: > > It appears that if we want full security key support for Google > > Accounts in Firefox in the near term, we need to

Re: Intent-to-Ship: Backward-Compatibility FIDO U2F support for Google Accounts

2019-03-22 Thread Philip Jägenstedt
Hi all, Some naive questions to understand what's happened here. Is https://fidoalliance.org/specs/fido-u2f-v1.0-nfc-bt-amendment-20150514/fido-u2f-javascript-api.html#high-level-javascript-api the API that will be added to Firefox? Is

Re: Intent-to-Ship: Backward-Compatibility FIDO U2F support for Google Accounts

2019-03-21 Thread Henri Sivonen
On Thu, Mar 14, 2019 at 8:12 PM J.C. Jones wrote: > It appears that if we want full security key support for Google > Accounts in Firefox in the near term, we need to graduate our FIDO U2F > API support from “experimental and behind a pref” I think it's problematic to describe something as

Re: Intent-to-Ship: Backward-Compatibility FIDO U2F support for Google Accounts

2019-03-14 Thread jonathan--- via dev-platform
On Thursday, March 14, 2019 at 7:22:21 PM UTC-4, acze...@google.com wrote: > Hi there, > > Chiming in from Google. This has nothing to do with our level of motivation > (which is high btw). This has to do with OEM burned-in images on Android > devices that have already shipped and the

Re: Intent-to-Ship: Backward-Compatibility FIDO U2F support for Google Accounts

2019-03-14 Thread aczeskis--- via dev-platform
Hi there, Chiming in from Google. This has nothing to do with our level of motivation (which is high btw). This has to do with OEM burned-in images on Android devices that have already shipped and the lifecycle of these devices out in the field. Without going into too many details, in order

Re: Intent-to-Ship: Backward-Compatibility FIDO U2F support for Google Accounts

2019-03-14 Thread Robert O'Callahan
On Fri, Mar 15, 2019 at 10:35 AM devsnek wrote: > If this is how you feel, encourage Google to fix the problem. This isn't > Firefox's fault, Firefox is doing the right thing by supporting > standardized APIs instead of "whatever Google uses". It's incredibly > frustrating and demoralizing to

Re: Intent-to-Ship: Backward-Compatibility FIDO U2F support for Google Accounts

2019-03-14 Thread devsnek
On Thursday, 14 March 2019 13:12:24 UTC-5, JC Jones wrote: > However, a multi-year delay for the largest security key-enabled web > property is, I think, unreasonable to push upon our users. We should > do what’s necessary to enable full security key support on Google > Accounts as quickly as is

Re: Intent-to-Ship: Backward-Compatibility FIDO U2F support for Google Accounts

2019-03-14 Thread Daniel Veditz
On Thu, Mar 14, 2019 at 11:25 AM Alex Gaynor wrote: > one overriding concern: phishing, particularly moderately-sophisticated > phishing which can handle forms of 2FA such as TOTP, SMS, or push, is a > scourge. TOTP was never much defense against phishing, just password compromise (shoulder

Re: Intent-to-Ship: Backward-Compatibility FIDO U2F support for Google Accounts

2019-03-14 Thread Alex Gaynor
There are a lot of good reasons to oppose this: - This is a very frustrating _expansion_ of non-standard APIs, more than a year after we shipped the W3C standard API - It'll put pressure on other browsers, which were only implementing webauthn, to also support u2f.js - It'll prolong the period of

Intent-to-Ship: Backward-Compatibility FIDO U2F support for Google Accounts

2019-03-14 Thread J.C. Jones
Web Authentication (WebAuthn) is our best technical response to phishing, which is why we’ve championed it as a technology. All major browsers either support it already, or have their support in-progress, yet adoption by websites has been slow. The deprecated Javascript API that WebAuthn replaces,