this post was submitted on 24 Oct 2024
764 points (99.0% liked)

Technology

59963 readers
3495 users here now

This is a most excellent place for technology news and articles.


Our Rules


  1. Follow the lemmy.world rules.
  2. Only tech related content.
  3. Be excellent to each another!
  4. Mod approved content bots can post up to 10 articles per day.
  5. Threads asking for personal tech support may be deleted.
  6. Politics threads may be removed.
  7. No memes allowed as posts, OK to post as comments.
  8. Only approved bots from the list below, to ask if your bot can be added please contact us.
  9. Check for duplicates before posting, duplicates may be removed

Approved Bots


founded 2 years ago
MODERATORS
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[–] virku@lemmy.world 1 points 1 month ago (9 children)

BankID is it's own trusted platform. It is not connected to any of them. I am not sure if I understand what the other person is trying to say. Maybe they are afraid that Google and Apple can use BankID verified sessions to better identify the user?

[–] Lifter@discuss.tchncs.de 1 points 1 month ago (8 children)

They are using the phone SDKs to verify that BankID was correctly installed, much like any other client side DRM.

[–] virku@lemmy.world 1 points 1 month ago* (last edited 1 month ago) (7 children)

I don't think BankID has any sort of SDK that lets other apps access user data like that? All interaction with BankID I know of at least is triggered with the app needing authentication/signature opening a BankID session to the central service where you enter your authentication and then the BankID app is used as MFA to verify this.

Or am I misunderstanding what you are saying completely?

[–] Lifter@discuss.tchncs.de 4 points 1 month ago (2 children)

What I meant was that the phone operating system has SDKs (e.g. google services on android) which the app uses to make sure it hasn't been tampered with, which makes it even harder to make an open source client.

It's the opposite of supplying an SDK for third party developers.

[–] Lifter@discuss.tchncs.de 4 points 1 month ago

Or even run the app as is on a "non-compliant" os - like a rooted android.

[–] virku@lemmy.world 1 points 1 month ago (1 children)

Oh I see. Thanks for the clarification. Is that something they could have gone without and still be as secure as possible?

[–] Lifter@discuss.tchncs.de 2 points 1 month ago

Not if you ask them but taking the time to design a system that isn't reliant on a strong client (and then open sourcing it) would probably be more secure, and obviously more inclusive.

For instance, I'm very eager to switch to a lknux phone but having blockers like this is forcing me to stay on Android, even though I am sick and tired or the enshittification.

load more comments (4 replies)
load more comments (4 replies)
load more comments (4 replies)