Slashdot Mirror
Liberty Alliance Completes Phase 2
g0_p writes "According to CNET the Liberty Alliance project released its phase 2 specifications for the Liberty Identity Web Services Framework. This will provide the much talked about 'single-sign-on' to multiple websites capability. Websites will be able to securely share information about the user including credit card data. The biggest benefit of sharing this kind of data is for people using web services through handhelds and mobile phones (Lesser buttons to click to buy birthday gift..). This may be significant, since many of the new phone models have web browsing capability and there is a considerable surge in sales. Now that this phase is complete we should start seeing this standard being implemented out there on the web. It would also be interesting to see how it stands up against Microsoft Passport in terms of security which has had troubles in the past."
No initiative is going to work unless someone gets a major credit card company on-board to assume the risk, pure and simple.
Frankly, I don't want "single-sign-on", and I don't get why other people would either. The information I'd want to be available to my bank is completely different from what I'd want to be available to "Jim's Hardware Shack".
Presumably, in order for this to work effectively, if you have one standardized set of information about "you", it would have to be the superset of information you'd need for all the sites you use. And, to be efficient from an implementation standpoint, I'd expect this information will be replicated all over the place in various caching mechanisms. This leaves your information fully available to web site operators reputable, disreputable, secure and hackable alike. As well as likely creating a situation where if your primary "record" is compromised, it could provide enough information to allow access "as you" to *all* the web sites you use. This seems like quite a high price to pay for the need to create a separate login for each site, which realistically, is probably on the order of a dozen or two registered sites a year for most users.
~ Whence do you come, slayer of men, or where are you going, conqueror of space?
This tripe reads like a press release. Leading in with "According to CNET" is particularly deceptive when used here. I say that g0_p, the submitter, works for Ketchum, the public relations firm that represents Liberty Alliance. I also say that Robert Lemos the "CNET Staff Writer" responsible for the article, just took a press release and changed a few words. This is not his writing, nor are the other ten articles he "wrote" for CNET this week..
"They that can give up essential liberty to obtain a little temporary keystroke reduction deserve neither liberty nor keystroke reduction."
If Passport doesn't convert to the "Liberty Identity Web Services Framework", I fail to see how this can get wide consumer usage. Remember, people just want to buy stuff online, they don't want to learn about the differences between passport and a services framework. Somehow they're either going to have to persuade MS to use the framework, or make a superior client that's easy to download (maybe make it an ActiveX control?) Of course, the problem is, Passport ships with Windows/IE, so it's going to be more quickly available that any other client.
If you are worried about this then stop clicking "Yes" to the "Do you want mozilla to remember this information" box. Or turn the feature off altogether.
Don't make Mozilla out to be wrong just because you don't know how to read dialogs.
WS:Federation does.
In the federated identity world, the showdown is going to come between Liberty and WS:Fed. Liberty currently has the advantage of actually existing, and the spec followed a very open and transparent development model that was very inclusive (as spec development goes). WS:Fed on the other hand was developed behind closed doors by Microsoft and (to a lesser extent) IBM, and is just now applying for standards body recognition.
Another noteworthy point is that Liberty by design is very similar to Shibboleth, an Internet2 Middleware initiative for higher education federated authentication/authorization that has been very successful. Both are built off of Oasis's SAML spec. Shibboleth however places far more emphasis on user privacy.
Finkployd
If I would see a car lot called "Honest Al's Used Cars", I'd hold on to my wallet. Honest people don't usually point out their own honesty.
And when bunch of big companies try to figure out easy and effective ways to share information about me, and call it "the liberty alliance", I doubt that liberty is uppermost in their minds.
As everyone has pointed out, no one wants this stuff, and we'd all be better off if it just went away.
I only know that Sun has a liberty compliant implementation. Does anybody know of an OSS project geared at being compliant? Also, I think one thing this project needs to tackle next is authentication strength. I may have app A and app B authenticating to one backend data source (i.e. Active Directory, LDAP, IMAP, etc) but app A may have more critical data and may require additional creditional (i.e. biometrics, smart card, etc). Being able to chain these credentials to the applications desire authentication strength is going to be key.
You never saw a fish on the wall with its mouth shut.
When i think of ultimate security of my personal information it doesn't include giving it to some service to remember it for me because i am too lazy to pull out my wallet and type in some numbers. Heck, if i'm going that far I should just get a remote control for my computer so i can hit the amazon.com button on it and then hit the big red BUY! button. Anyway.. back to my point.. I dont trust that people that i don't know will take care of personal information better then i can.
Consumer: "Lord Gates, only you could be so bold. When the US senate hears about this..."
....
Lord Gates: "Don't play games with me. You weren't on any mercy mission this time. We intercepted several credit card transmissions from you."
Consumer: "I don't know what you're talking about, I'm on a shopping mission."
Lord Gates: "You are a member of the Liberty Alliance and a traitor!" [to guards] "Take them away!"
Later, in a Passport meeting:
Lackey #1: "Holding her is dangerous... when the Senate hears about this..."
Lord Gates: "That won't be a problem. The US Senate has been disbanded. The Regional Sales Leaders have direct control now."
Lackey #2: "But how will you maintain control without the beaurocracy?"
Lord Gates: "Fear will keep them in line. Fear of our legal department."
The Saga Continues...