It's strange and rather unfortunate to see this constant reinvention of authentication methods. Asymmetric encryption as used in things like SSH keys and TLS client authentication have been around for decades, are very much standard, and the only changes to those have been stronger algorithms and longer keys. Smartcards as hardware secure elements have also been around for a long time. I'm not sure how much of a conspiracy theory it is to say that things like this are merely attempts by Big Tech to stronghandle everyone into their own idea of "standards" and run away from all the smaller players in the industry, but I'm sure that we had everything necessary for "passwordless authentication" two decades ago, or at least methods in which it's not necessary to send a password to the authenticating server nor store them there.
Its absolutely not a conspiracy theory, but it is a bit more complex than that there is was a coordinated push - there was a big push a while back from the likes of Microsoft to e.g. eradicate ssh credentials - in favor of stuff like AD (ugh, why?), specifically wrt to git clients. I know, GitHub still takes ssh (they'd break too many people otherwise), but places started moving towards AD, or "password manager integration" clients.
Part of that is on the "security contractors", who are objectively snake-oil salesmen (when you make a living selling people publicly, freely available, publicly supported software, and charging 6 figures for it, that is the definition of a swindler), especially since they started propagating their whole "security regimen" as a set of tasteless, mostly useless "security awareness" trainings. They harped a lot on choosing good passwords, caused a lot of bad password security practices on almost every website (I still see this everywhere online - please use 10 characters with one symbol from (!$./ ... etc) and 1 number - no - use entropic password measurement and maybe don't assume your site is important enough to warrrant a high-entropy password).
So, once we were all left with an unsustainable bag of crappy passwords for every buytoothpaste.com website out there... well we all had to try to invent something else. There was SSO OAuth, that failed because it was overcomplex (or got rolled into a banal corporate policy system which was horridly complex to deploy and the security contractors got paid to audit the bad systems).
Then pile on the other heap of bad password strenghtening abstractions (2FA), etc., you get to today. We never had SSH for the browser, GPG/PGP remained meh, so the result is a constant stream of "new solutions" to a problem which could have been solved by a) Not caring as much about passwords, communicate risk to the users instead b) fixing ssl/ssh.
And why did nobody do a) or b)? Again, I blame "security contractors" for a) and b) people not being paid to do it.
Yeah, profit-seekers will always try to capitalize on chaos, that's hardly conspiracy, that's just business.
Perhaps not reinvention but rather repackaging. Web Authentication (on which this is based) is (just) asymmetric encryption in an authentication challenge/response protocol.
It is at an API level, rather than the transport level like SSH and TLS, because applications often often have more complex requirements than these provide. In particular, SSH and mutual TLS typically expect traffic to be authenticated at the transport level on use, and for the credential to exist and be evaluated at first interaction. Websites typically have registration and self-service management functions, as well as anonymous access.
There is also nothing especially new about the use of hardware secure elements, nor was anything new claimed.
I will say as someone who implemented website smartcard-based authentication a decade ago - the experience was typically very poor, because the software stack had not been built for that use case, and often relied on third-party components which were simply sub-par.
There's a lot to be said for reusing technology, but there's also a lot to be said for creating the best possible experience. The MTLS experience that has existed has not gotten any notable consumer adoption for very valid reasons.
Well, there's encryption algorithms, and then there's authentication methods... Don't confuse the two. There's actually been a lot of interesting developments in authentication methods... not the least of which have been the FIDO 2.0/WebAuthn standards. While you might perceive them as plays by Big Tech, smaller companies like Yubikey are kind of at the core of it, and without WebAuthn in particular, it was rather hard to have confidence in browser based authentication. Yes, there were certificates, but the general public has struggled to understand and adopt device certificates in a way that doesn't lead to them being stolen.
There was already a passwordless authentication mechanism in browsers called SSL client certificates. Approximately nothing uses it because it’s hard to use.
