Slashdot Mirror

← Back to Stories (view on slashdot.org)

The Liberty Alliance Grows Again

Posted by Hemos on from the now-if-they-would-just-do-something dept.

sempf writes "The Liberty Alliance, a Sun-backed open-specification alternative to the Microsoft platform's Passport system, has added two very powerful members, Oracle and Intel. Now over 150 members, one wonders at the future of a world where we have two single sign-on systems. With the three big IM platforms joining forces, is the identity standard of the world going to be Microsoft, or Sun? Is this going to be the next Browser War?"

16 of 111 comments (clear)

  1. No. by Morgahastu · · Score: 4, Insightful

    No. There won't be a war because no one wants it. MSN's passport has been around for a long time now and barely anyone uses it.

  2. Single Sign In by dochood · · Score: 4, Insightful

    It's called Mac OS X's Keychain.

  3. who cares? by castlec · · Score: 5, Insightful

    Who cares what company has the new identification standard? I'd rather keep my multiple passwords than rely on one breach of one system to lose my entire online life. I'd assume most geeks are the same and I've met some pretty paranoid non-geeks out there about having any information on the web. So unless we really believe that the information we need to have to exist in our online world won't be available outside of the authentication standards of a few companies, we have nothing to worry about.

    --
    When I tell an object to delete this, am I killing it or telling it to kill me?
    1. Re:who cares? by sigaar · · Score: 3, Insightful

      Well I certainly don't want one password for everything, much less a very server which has the names of all the services that I use in. Right now I *can* have the same password for everything I use, and who would know. If someone breaks into my hotmail account, then that's about it, they broke into my hotmail account. They still don't know squat about any other services I might use.

      Let users choose for themselves. But having one password and links to all the services I log into, stored by the company who almost only ever make news when another of their security vulnerabilites is discoverd, or they get sued over improper business practises, or they're trying to lie themselves out of loosing more market share, that's not for me.

      --
      sigaar
  4. Sign-on War by bheer · · Score: 5, Insightful

    I'll believe there's a "sign-on war" the day Ebay locks people out for not having a passport/liberty alliance account. (Currently they support Passport+their own system.)

    Honestly, site-specific sign-on systems are easy to develop and most e-tailers have a powerful motive to offer their customers as many choices as possible. This is stark contrast to the one-or-the-other image a "war" connotes.

    --
    Go somewhere random
    1. Re:Sign-on War by iMMersE · · Score: 3, Insightful

      To get as many people using their system? I, for one, am often put off when having to fill in a form to gain access to some area of a site. If I just just sign in using some shared system, I would use more of these sites.

      --
      codegolf.com - smaller *is* better.
  5. How universal can it be? by frostman · · Score: 4, Insightful

    How universal can any kind of "identity system" be before it gets scary and/or illegal? (Illegal in countries with data protection laws anyway.)

    Nokia is on board with this, and as more and more of my personal information gets concentrated on my phone I'll probably end up using it.

    Eventually we'll probably all have a digital "passport" of some kind - and much better this way than the Microsoft way - but it's still a bit creepy.

    --

    This Like That - fun with words!

  6. Microsoft or Sun? No... by Glock27 · · Score: 5, Insightful
    is the identity standard of the world going to be Microsoft, or Sun?

    With, as you point out, over 150 member companies the Liberty Alliance is scarcely just "Sun".

    --
    Galileo: "The Earth revolves around the Sun!"
    Score: -1 100% Flamebait
  7. How about this... by danheskett · · Score: 4, Insightful

    ...Single sign-on outside the corporate network (aka, the Internet at large) is a problem that doesn't need much solving..

    ..and both MS and Sun will fail at solving a problem that doesn't really need solving.

    A better approach would be for either MS or Sun to develop multi-langauge, multi-platform products that will help web developers implement standard password requirements, username/password schemes, etc.

    Forcing a lame implementation of bad technology isn't going to work.

    1. Re:How about this... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1, Insightful

      So what would your "better approach" actually do?

      So I get a multiplatform tool that helps me make people choose certain usernames/passwords on my website.

      How does that fix the problem of said people having dozens of usernames/passwords on multiple websites?

    2. Re:How about this... by AmaDaden · · Score: 2, Insightful

      Yeah, but if Sun and everybody else just left this alone and it DID turn in to something we would all be stuck using MS for something else. So despite how worthless it seems I'm glad there opposing it. After all, better safe then sorry.

  8. My bet is on... by vashathastampedo · · Score: 2, Insightful

    Both Microsoft and Sun to make equally useless products that nobody really wants to use... for now.

  9. Summary is misleading by CdBee · · Score: 3, Insightful

    The big IM providers are NOT joining forces, they're just making a tidy sum providing Microsoft with a way of routing messages between networks. IM convergence would mean being able to send a message to a user on another network directly, that still is not on the cards.

    I'm just waiting for Google to offer a Messenger service, using a gMail account as a login. I think they could bring great things to the IM market, especially if the based an offering on an OSS project like Jabber, for which other IM software providers could then incorporate support.

    Passport is already tied closely to Messenger and Windows XP in particular, I don't see the opposition gaining ground without going the same way.

    --
    I have been a user for about 10 years. This ends Feb 2014. The site's been ruined. I'm off. Dice, FU
    1. Re:Summary is misleading by sempf · · Score: 4, Insightful

      ... IM providers are NOT joining forces ... IM convergence would mean ...

      Note that I did NOT say IM convergence. I DID say they are joining forces. They are. Despite all of the vitrol, reality has forced them to hold hands and play nice. I'm sure the ability to send a message from one platform to another using a common P2P platform is not far off, despite your claims.

      How exactly is Google making a gMail messenger any different from MSN mesenger, or Yahoo messenger? All great brands, all good technology. Will it be better because you like Google more? Don't get me wrong, I like Google too, but how will a fourth standard make it any better?

      --
      /usr/bin/grep -i -E meaning life.txt
  10. Neither? by blanks · · Score: 3, Insightful

    How about I just keep my identity and NOT have any single company owning my personal data? Yes convince is what America is all about, but there are still many steps needed to be taken in the real world to prove your identity, why do we need one system that everything will be required to use (think about the future). With something like this, I can see something bad happening. The US government (world government too) has been trying to remove the ability to be anonymous on the internet, with a system like this INFORCED at many different levels, the ability to be anonymous would no longer exist, the moment you connect your pc to the internet (LAN?) you would be authenticated.

    --
    TruePunk | Games
    1. Re:Neither? by iso · · Score: 2, Insightful

      How about I just keep my identity and NOT have any single company owning my personal data?

      That's what the Liberty Alliance is. It's a way to share authentication info without one company controlling it all. RTFA.