Comparison
Dapple vs. traditional MFA
Code-based and push-based MFA was a huge upgrade over passwords alone — in 2015. Modern phishing kits proxy codes in real time, and attackers spam push prompts until someone taps approve. “Has MFA” is no longer the bar; “phishing-resistant” is.
| Attack / burden | Dapple passkeys | Push-based MFA | 6-digit codes (TOTP/SMS) |
|---|---|---|---|
| Fake login page (AiTM proxy) | Blocked — credential is origin-bound | Bypassed — user approves the attacker’s session | Bypassed — code relayed in seconds |
| MFA fatigue / prompt bombing | Immune — nothing to spam | Primary target | N/A |
| SIM swap | Immune | Immune | SMS codes stolen |
| Helpdesk social engineering | No resets to socially engineer | Reset flows attackable | Reset flows attackable |
| Password still required | No — passwordless | Yes, plus the prompt | Yes, plus the code |
| Daily user friction | One biometric gesture | Wait, switch device, tap | Read, memorize, type, mistype |
| Meets “phishing-resistant MFA” requirements (insurance, OMB M-22-09) | Yes | Increasingly no | No |
Comparisons based on publicly available information as of July 2026 — corrections welcome. The right answer depends on your environment; that’s what a 20-minute demo is for.
Book a Demo