Google's Password Manager Gains Biometric Authentication on Desktop

Google's aiming to make it easier to use and secure passwords -- at least, for users of the Password Manager tool built into its Chrome browser. From a report: Today, the tech giant announced that Password Manager, which generates unique passwords and autofills them across platforms, will soon gain biometric authentication on PC. (Android and iOS have had biometric authentication for some time.) When enabled, it'll require an additional layer of security, like fingerprint recognition or facial recognition, before Chrome autofills passwords.

Exactly which types of biometrics are available in Password Manager on desktop will depend on the hardware attached to the PC, of course (e.g. a fingerprint reader), as well as whether the PC's operating system supports it. Beyond "soon," Google didn't say when to expect the feature to arrive.

Separate? Or windows Hello integrated?

[thegarbz]

As it stands Google already askes for Windows Hello authentication when you wish to view your passwords, and that already supports biometrics. Are they adding this option, or rolling yet another unique thing?

Does this solve a problem?

[Derec01]

I understand that this will likely bring the general level of password management up for most people, but I struggle to see why an already conscientious user would want this.

I already use a password manager with strong passwords for most sites and applications. What happens if I die? What happens if the fingerprint reader dies at an inopportune moment? Right now I can just share the password with my family or put it in a safe deposit box. And sure, I can set up *their* fingerprints as well, but this all seems like a lot more steps to achieve about the same security I have now.

Re:

[Joe_Dragon]

just need an gummy bear to clone an fingerprint

Re:

[nellbones]

It mainly solves a problem of convenience. working with the limited information and how it works currently, my guess is its going to be like androids biometrics where they just save you from having to input a password when they work, and ask for that password when they don't. I see this being most useful to a more tech illiterate person who already uses things like windows hello/touch id to authenticate into their computer.

Re:

[drinkypoo]

On my phone the fingerprint reader gets me in quickly. Sometimes the phone wants my pin also, like if I haven't used it in a long time, or if it is my first login since reboot. I never have to use the fingerprint.

Re:

[Local ID10T]

This is an improvement for most people... just not for you because [reasons].

You are not the target market. Most people is the target market.

Re:

[Derec01]

This is an improvement for most people... just not for you because [reasons].

You are not the target market. Most people is the target market.

...which I acknowledged in my first sentence. I was specifically curious if there's a general security benefit for all users that I'm overlooking. I suppose not.

Re:

[Local ID10T]

Likely only in the "a rising tide lifts all boats" sense...

People generally using less vulnerable passwords reduces the value of hackers attempts. If it is not as profitable to attempt to compromise via vulnerable passwords, less attempts at it will be made.

Re:

[AmiMoJo]

If you are happy with your current password manager then there is no reason to change. This is for the kind of people who use face recognition to log in to Windows. Their threat model is that their housemate or kid screws around with their computer. Good for managers too, if IT can't get them to use decent passwords.

Potential biometrics ...

[fahrbot-bot]

Exactly which types of biometrics are available in Password Manager on desktop will depend on the hardware attached to the PC, ...

I'll lobby for a CGM [wikipedia.org] -- people will probably have to eat something specific to get the right result.

Anyone else want to weight in? :-)

Re:

[jonwil]

How about one of those alcohol monitoring devices like they fit to cars. Wont unlock things if you have had too much booze...

No, not me

[gtall]

I'm not impressed with the quality of finger print readers. And adding bio metrics through the OS just means your biometrics has one more way to spew where it should be.

Re:

[Fly Swatter]

Speaking of spewing, it seems silly to use a fingerprint for security since you tend to leave them everywhere you go...

Re:

[timeOday]

Almost all the actual fraud on the internet, such as people stealing your credit card number, is by people for whom that is not a practical attack.

I am to the point where I would like to create a credit card number that would require cellphone verification for every transaction because I am so sick of having to change my card every time some online vendor loses or steals my number.

Re:

[Fly Swatter]

Sounds like a job for something like paypal. Or find reputable vendors (and yes I realize any vendor can get hacked).

Laptops "Mabye.", Desktops "No."

[NotEmmanuelGoldstein]

When enabled, it'll require an additional layer of security ...

The common use-case for Google Chrome is an office computer: Where, the small-office/home-office (SOHO) uses personal settings, not enterprise settings. They don't want Chrome locked to one user, because the computer is shared by staff, because they don't have a copy of the password outside Chrome.

There's the problem of depending on extra hardware, that could fail. Also, there's the general idea that bio-metrics is less secure.