SQRL wan't wrong, it was early

(sjg.io)

29 points | by simonjgreen 2 days ago

4 comments

  • paulryanrogers 9 hours ago
    SQRL has the same weakness as passkeys: secrets on device are too easily lost, gatekeepers too greedy to solve that without taking away user sovereignty, and people don't understand it.

    IMO both solutions are a lost cause. Hopefully I'm just cynical and something can be worked out.

  • breput 9 hours ago
    It was too early, but also lingered in development for far too long. It also never had the proper server-side implementations, so it could feel like a solution in search of a problem.

    That said, the design is far more advanced than the rolling disaster which is Passkey and it is much better suited for small Yubikey-type devices, where you could easily have unlimited site support. It also had intrinsic portability and advanced real-world security considerations, such as an attestation that instructed a server to disable weaker authentication methods, such as email or SMS (which is also a customer support disaster, but still...).

    Ultimately, SQRL is an object lesson that the best technical design doesn't always win - it needs the right timing and robust community/corporate support.

    Edit: Also, the (client) reference implementation was written in x86 assembly language for Windows. So I'd say the timing, support, and portability are all reasons for the lack of adoption.

  • kj4ips 9 hours ago
    Discord and Steam have a user login flow that is very similar to what SQRL was aiming for, including a QR code alongside the username/password fields. While it's a closed implementation of a different system, I think of SQRL every time I use it.

    I might be biased, I used the PPP Pam module on linux for years, until I moved to TOTP, and then eventually to pubkey-only.

  • DANmode 9 hours ago
    eh. it’s cool,

    but compared to FIDO which existed when it was made, it’s pretty obviously “wrong”.