Linux

The features they're talking about are secure from a cryptographic standpoint.

However, there are features built into the passkey system so that a company could decide that it will only accept passkeys from a specific piece of hardware or software.

This isn't necessarily bad, you may only want your server to allow you access if the passkey comes from your phone's hardware. A person could have stolen your passkey but they're unable to fake the attestation step.

On the other end of things, a company like Google could provide a passkey service which requires you to use hardware provided by vendors that they approve of and they could abuse their position to force it's implementation, such as how you can use Google to sign into websites via OIDC.

Google could just as easily provide a service for 'secure' passkeys which are only allowed to be issued by phones provided by Google, Verizon or AT&T. No more third-party OSs (at least, if you want to sign into anything on the Internet) and no more jailbroken phones. You would have to use the exact, spyware laden, operating system that comes installed directly from your cellular provider who would have remote root access to your device.

I think the idea that we can just boycott passkeys and prevent this is nonsense magical thinking. It requires some hypothetical world where we can perfectly coordinate a boycott of otherwise useful technology. In reality this issue will remain obscure and generally only known to people interested in the topic while Google can pour tens of millions in advertising to reach everybody on the planet explaining how good and secure attested passkeys are to mainstream Internet users.

Use passkeys, they're useful and more secure than passwords. Not using them won't prevent enshittification, just sit back and watch the slow motion attested passkey trainwreck as it unfolds over the next decade.