Skip to content
Literature · Electronics EN LLM context A cited markdown file you can paste into your AI assistant (ChatGPT, Claude, a RAG or project knowledge base) to ground it in this document. Contains: this document’s text, its sections with their topics, and the full text of every law provision it applies. Everything links back to its source on overview.legal — legal information, not advice.

Comparative Analysis of Passkeys (FIDO2 Authentication) on Android and iOS for GDPR Compliance in Biometric Data Protection

Albert Carroll, Shahram Latifi — Electronics

Albert Carroll, Shahram Latifi — Electronics

Electronics
DOI

Full text

Biometric authentication, such as facial recognition and fingerprint scanning, is now standard on mobile devices, offering secure and convenient access. However, the processing of biometric data is tightly regulated under the European Union’s General Data Protection Regulation (GDPR), where such data qualifies as “special category” personal data when used for uniquely identifying individuals. Compliance requires meeting strict conditions, including explicit consent and data protection by design. Passkeys, the modern name for FIDO2-based authentication credentials developed by the FIDO Alliance, enable passwordless login using public key cryptography. Its “match-on-device” architecture stores biometric data locally in secure hardware (e.g., Android’s Trusted Execution Environment, Apple’s Secure Enclave), potentially reducing the regulatory obligations associated with cloud-based biometric processing. This paper examines how Passkeys are implemented on Android and iOS platforms and their differences in architecture, API access, and hardware design, and how those differences affect compliance with the GDPR. Through a comparative analysis, we evaluate the extent to which each platform supports local processing, data minimization, and user control—key principles under GDPR. We find that while both platforms implement strong local protections, differences in developer access, trust models, and biometric isolation can influence the effectiveness and regulatory exposure of Passkeys deployment. These differences have direct implications for privacy risk, legal compliance, and implementation choices by app developers and service providers. Our findings highlight the need for platform-aware design and regulatory interpretation in the deployment of biometric authentication technologies. This work can help inform stakeholders, policymakers, and legal experts in drafting robust privacy and ethical policies—not only in the realm of biometrics but across AI technologies more broadly. By understanding platform-level implications, future frameworks can better align technical design with regulatory compliance and ethical standards.

How it connects

Guidelines 1/2020 processing personal data in the context of connected vehicles and mobility related applications Guidelines on processing of personal data through video devices Guidelines ·EDPB Jan 28, 2020 Personal Data Privacy by Design & Default Processing
Opinion 11/2024 use of facial recognition to streamline airport passengers’ flow (compatibility with Articles 5(1)(e) and(f), 25 and 32 GDPR) A dopted Opinion 11/2024 on the use of facial recognition to streamline airport passengers’ flow (compatibility with Articles 5(1)(e) and(f), 25 and 32 GDPR Version 1.1 Adopted on… Opinion ·EDPB May 24, 2024 Biometric Data Storage Limitation Identification
15625/2026 Cass.Civ. - 15625/2026 Istituto nazionale della previdenza sociale (INPS, the controller) is the Italian National Institute for Social Security. In 2021, the DPA fined the controller €300,000 for its… Supreme Court May 21, 2026 Privacy by Design & Default Privacy by Design DPIA
2022 EDPB Annual Report 2021 Enhancing the depth and breadth of data protection 2 EDPB Annual Report 2021 2 ENHANCING THE DEPTH AND BREADTH OF DATA PROTECTION An Executive Summary of this report, which… May 12, 2022 Privacy Shield Integrity and Confidentiality Principle International Transfer