MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort

The Passwordless Authentication with Passkey Technology from an Implementation Perspective

2025· article· W4416800154 on OpenAlexaff
Lien Tran, Boyuan Zhang, Ratchanon Pawanja, Rashid Hussain Khokhar

Bibliographic record

Venuenot available
Typearticle
Language
FieldComputer Science
TopicUser Authentication and Security Systems
Canadian institutionsAlgoma University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsAuthentication (law)PasswordPhishingMulti-factor authenticationKey (lock)Challenge–response authenticationPassword policy

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

With the rise of sophisticated authentication bypass techniques, passwords are no longer considered a reliable method for securing authentication systems. In recent years, new authentication technologies have shifted from traditional password-based logins to passwordless security. Among these, Time-Based One-Time Passwords (TOTP) remain one of the most widely used mechanisms, while Passkeys are emerging as a promising alternative with growing adoption. This paper highlights the key techniques used during the implementation of the authentication system with Passkey technology. It also suggests considerations for integrating components during system development to ensure that users can securely access their accounts with minimal complexity, while still meeting the requirements of a robust authentication system that balances security, usability, and performance. Additionally, by examining TOTP and Passkey mechanisms from an implementation perspective, this work not only addresses major security concerns such as password leaks, phishing attacks, and susceptibility to bruteforce attacks, but also evaluates the feasibility and effectiveness of these mechanisms in real-world implementations. This paper demonstrates the superior security of Passkey technology and its potential for broader adoption in secure authentication systems.

Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.

How this classification was reachedexpand

Full frame distilled prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesScholarly communication
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Theoretical or conceptual · Consensus signal: Theoretical or conceptual
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.793
Threshold uncertainty score1.000

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.002
Science and technology studies0.0010.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0020.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

Machine scores (provisional)

The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.

Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.

Opus teacher head0.009
GPT teacher head0.322
Teacher spread0.314 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, not a consensus.

Study designTheoretical or conceptual
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".

Quick stats

Citations0
Published2025
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same topicUser Authentication and Security SystemsFrench-language works237,207