Slashdot Mirror


eBay Retires MS Passport Sign-In

fihzy writes "eBay have announced they will retire Microsoft Passport Sign-In and .NET alerts. The Microsoft Passport Directory of Sites has been discontinued, too. Is Microsoft's Single Sign-On vision edging towards oblivion?"

66 of 304 comments (clear)

  1. well by 0xdeaddead · · Score: 2, Insightful

    On one hand its cool if you forget your ID, because you use the site infreqeuently... On the other hand do you trust Microsoft that much?!

    1. Re:well by superpulpsicle · · Score: 4, Interesting

      Man I had a .net account. I always frequently login. Out of the blues one day, my password just locked me out. I emailed the M$ support folks, and not a single person replied. My account was just gone basically, and no one gave a shit.

    2. Re:well by bulliver · · Score: 3, Insightful

      Speaking personally, it's not that I mistrust Microsoft (which I do...) but rather I don't trust *any* password saving programs. Simply put, the more you trust these tools to carry your sensitive info, the more you give up your security and privacy.

      --
      Support the mob or mysteriously disappear.
    3. Re:well by adeydas · · Score: 2, Interesting

      that's microsoft's way of telling that they care...

    4. Re:well by gl4ss · · Score: 2, Interesting

      which is an prime example why you as a company like ebay wouldn't like to use the system.

      you wouldn't like to look/be responsible for a system you don't have the keys to, it's quite hard to fix things that you can't access even.

      --
      world was created 5 seconds before this post as it is.
    5. Re:well by MMMDI · · Score: 2, Informative

      I'll bite.

      <a href="http://www.yourlinkhere.com">Your text here</a>

  2. In Other shocking news... by herbert_axelrod · · Score: 2, Funny

    All editors at the slashdot camp are sporting wood right now pending this wonderful M$ news!

  3. Edging into oblivion? by douthitb · · Score: 5, Funny

    Did I miss something? Was Microsoft's single sign-on vision ever in danger of becoming main stream?

    1. Re:Edging into oblivion? by killjoe · · Score: 5, Insightful

      Although MS has suffered from a lot of spectacular failures latelly, anything they do is in danger of becoming main stream. A monopoly on the desktop and office software is a tremendous weapon to wield against the rest of the world.

      --
      evil is as evil does
    2. Re:Edging into oblivion? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 2, Funny

      Monopoly trumps mediocrity on a regular basis.

    3. Re:Edging into oblivion? by skrolle2 · · Score: 5, Interesting

      I used to work on a similar system for another major portal business, although only for our own portfolio of websites, and we took this stuff really seriously for a while. When eBay joined, we were starting to get a bit scared, because if the passport thing had taken off, our business would have gone bye-bye.

      The worst thing about Passport and the related .Net services was that MS intended not only to store a username and password, but store ALL user information. Participating sites would then have free access to the information they contributed to the system, but would have to pay for anything else. Also, using the entire .Net portfolio would have made it simple for web developers to build a system with a "secure" passport logon and user database, but VERY difficult to obtain control over their own data. Microsoft, on the other hand, would have complete access to all user data regardless of source. They could have become the gatekeeper, the only company with control over user data, and everyone else paying them for data mining rights in their own data. We should be VERY thankful that it didn't take off.

      In retrospect, Microsoft made a bunch of mistakes:

      1) The whole thing got muddled in the general confusion of .Net.

      2) Most other web companies actually valued control of their user data more than ease of development.

      3) No user demand for single sign-on, either because users don't care, or because they actually value their privacy and don't want different websites to share user data.

      It's finally gone. Good riddance.

  4. Good idea with major control issues by Donoho · · Score: 3, Insightful

    Is Microsoft's Single Sign-On vision edging towards oblivion?

    It's been dead for a while, people are still cleaning up the carcus.

  5. Microsoft Bob redux. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 3, Funny

    enough said...

  6. Good idea, bad implementation by prostoalex · · Score: 5, Insightful
    The idea is not that bad - instead of thousands of sites and message boards requiring registration, login and confirmation of the e-mail, have just one single entity provide and verify the virtual avatar.

    As a Webmkaster, I would like to have some simple authentication solution, so that the users dont have to register in forums and what not to post. However, the implementation is just unacceptable:

    There are two fees for licensing Passport: a periodic compliance testing fee of $1,500 US and a yearly provisioning fee of $10,000 US. The provisioning fee is charged on a per-company basis.


    Small sites who would benefit frim such service don't have $10,000 to throw around, and large sites, which do have the money, just will write their own username+password code.
    1. Re:Good idea, bad implementation by BrynM · · Score: 2, Insightful
      a periodic compliance testing fee of $1,500 US
      I bet those periodic tests just became more frequent for the sites that are left. Geez! Why would anyone sign a contract with MS so Ms could charge you $1,500 whenever they felt like making sure you were compliant. I bet they fine you for not being compliant as well!
      --
      US Democracy:The best person for the job (among These pre-selected choices...)
    2. Re:Good idea, bad implementation by Baricom · · Score: 2, Informative

      If was [sic] really important it would allow me...to change my password.

      In its infinite wisdom, Microsoft did make it possible to change your password. Here's how:

      1. Visit http://www.passport.com/ and sign in, if necessary. I even made it clickable here.
      2. Click "Member Services."
      3. Click "Change my password."
      4. Type your current password. Then, type your new password, and type it again to make sure you typed it correctly.
      5. Click "Continue."
  7. Re:FYI by tourettes · · Score: 5, Informative
    --
    tourettes
  8. nope by Quasar1999 · · Score: 3, Insightful

    Why bother to sign in to passport when each user will only run windows longhorn, and each user will have their own account, and the current active account can be queried by the website via some new fancy secure API initiative that will be in longhorn... thus forcing everyone to have to run longhorn in order to do so much as use ebay or amazon...

    or perhaps I am suffering from wearing a tinfoil hat too much... but I think I might be on to something... replace passport with something directly tied to windows that users have no choice in, since their machines have unique ID's, as do their accounts... they will not be able to be anonymous on the web, and said info will be used to make browsing easier for average joe q. public, meanwhile identifying every user out on the web... really sneaky... ;)

    --

    ---
    Programming is like sex... Make one mistake and support it the rest of your life.
    1. Re:nope by M.C.+Hampster · · Score: 2, Funny

      Insightful? Give me a break.

      Yeah, I'm sure that eBay and Amazon want to make sure they limit all of their customer base to only those people running a brand new OS. Sure.

      And in case you didn't realize, the system you are describing is already built into Windows XP. It's name? Microsoft Passport. You can tie your Windows account directly into your Passport account so you don't have to login. Look how well that's worked.

      Please, try to learn a little more about what you are talking about before making some stupid comment. Of course, if you're after karma, all you need to do is say something conspiratorial about M$ and you'll be fine.

      --
      Forget the whales - save the babies.
    2. Re:nope by Broadcatch · · Score: 4, Interesting

      Windows Longhorn will have an identity system in it, currently code-named InfoCard. But from what I hear, they are actually looking for open standards on which to base their identity infrastructure, and this would make a *lot* of sense. If they promoted a system that was 100% decentralized (as opposed to the 100% centralized Passport), free and open source, and integrated it sweetly into their OS, they would have an identity system that would be peerless and increase their market share (or at the least, not drive people away so fast).

      The only system I know of that fits the bill is the nascent Identity Commons system that is just starting to come online. (Disclaimer: I am 2idi's CTO)

      --

      The antidote for misuse of freedom of speech is more freedom of speech.
      -- Molly Ivins

    3. Re:nope by killjoe · · Score: 2, Insightful

      What in MS history leads you to think that they would adapt a free and open source identity system? I mean have they adopted any standard without extending them?

      Even if they did push for something like that do you really expect MS to follow their own standards?

      --
      evil is as evil does
    4. Re:nope by skrolle2 · · Score: 2, Insightful

      Why bother to sign in to passport when each user will only run windows longhorn, and each user will have their own account, and the current active account can be queried by the website via some new fancy secure API initiative that will be in longhorn... thus forcing everyone to have to run longhorn in order to do so much as use ebay or amazon...

      That was actually EXACTLY the goals of Windows XP, it's integration with the .Net Passport, and the .Net development portfolio. Microsofts vision was that every windows XP account was to be tied to a .Net Passport which would require users only to log on to their computer, and then while visiting every other Passport-enabled website they would automatically and transparently be signed in, and all participating websites would automatically have access to aggregated user information about you through the centralized Passport system.

      Be happy it failed. Be happy that users saw it for the privacy nightmare it was, and be happy that companies saw it for the information grab it was.

  9. Yahoo's going strong by DogDude · · Score: 3, Interesting

    I've said it before... Yahoo has done single sign in, and they've done it well without being abusive. Why MSN couldn't compete, I have no idea (since I never used their stuff). With Yahoo, it's all tied together relatively seamlessly, with extra security when you go to buy stuff. But with one sign in, you can get customized mail (of course), weather, financial info, news, message boards (Yahoo Groups), bookmarks, etc, etc, etc. So it's not that it can't be done and done well.

    --
    I don't respond to AC's.
    1. Re:Yahoo's going strong by prostoalex · · Score: 4, Insightful

      Well, MS has single sign-in within their MSN zoo, but the idea was outside licensing to sites like eBay. I am not aware of any Yahoo! implementations on the sites outside of its own.

  10. I actually used it by CdBee · · Score: 4, Interesting

    6 months after MS Passport was introduced on eBay I started using it. I gave up using it 3 months later after missing numerous sales due to passport authentication fscking up and logging me in moments after the bid deadline ended

    Eventually, I got a new login and walked away from one with 20 favourable reviews on it thanks to that damned system. Hope it fries in hell.

    --
    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:I actually used it by prostoalex · · Score: 5, Interesting

      Heh, yeah, that's true, Passport tends to lose your authentication cookie more often that a 3-year-old would lose his toys. You have financial losses, I would just get frustrated.

      On top of that I used their hotmail account to register for the Passport, since that's their recommended option. I never use Hotmail for my daily webmail, in fact, the only message I have there is a thank-you for signing up. The bozos from hotmail kept threatening me with turning off the account, and they did execute their threats every 90 days. So unless I remember to log in to the Hotmail account, which I never use, I lose my passport, and have to go through easy but still frustrating retrival system at hotmail.

      The guys who designed this system are probably competing with Clippy team on who builds the most annoying product.

    2. Re:I actually used it by Osty · · Score: 2, Insightful

      On top of that I used their hotmail account to register for the Passport, since that's their recommended option. I never use Hotmail for my daily webmail, in fact, the only message I have there is a thank-you for signing up. The bozos from hotmail kept threatening me with turning off the account, and they did execute their threats every 90 days. So unless I remember to log in to the Hotmail account, which I never use, I lose my passport, and have to go through easy but still frustrating retrival system at hotmail.

      You don't need to use a hotmail.com or msn.com email address to get a Passport. Any email address will work.

  11. LOL by Anonymous+Crowhead · · Score: 4, Funny

    I read that as 'requires' instead of 'retires' and gleefully clicked on read more to see the frothing at the mouth that I assumed every single post would contain. What a disappointment.

  12. Is the only paid use going away? by hurfy · · Score: 2, Interesting

    Only other place i have seen that used it was Asheron's Call games.

    Those are currently being transfered to the developers in-house system.

    In a couple months that use will be gone too.

    What does that leaving using it? Hotmail?

    I never even linked my ebay to one of my .net passports even though i have several. Ebay already knows everything...why bother with passport.

    Nice idea but only handy if it filled out everything for you on lots of sites, which i dont think i'd like the idea of anyway.

  13. No one trusted Microsoft on this by Ars-Fartsica · · Score: 3, Interesting
    I don't think any company relished the concept of Microsoft being in control of their user's data records. Microsoft just doesn't have the goodwill to get something like this done.

    When it arrives, single sign-on is going to have to come with some bill of rights for users...I don't see MS providing any level of transparency.

  14. A Directory Page revision for MS... by BrynM · · Score: 4, Funny
    .NET Passport - Directory of Site(s)

    The .NET Passport service offers streamlined sign-in at a wide range of Web sites and services that are soley owned by Microsoft.

    We have discontinued our Site Directory because nobody really trusts us and few people really care, but you'll know when you can use your Passport to make sign-in easier and the marketing data more easily collected. Just look for the .NET Passport Sign In button! We have one at least. You can use the Passport account you created to get us to stop bothering you about it after your Windows or Microsoft Office install process. One day, the powerful Passport login will give you exclusive access to Security Patches, Updates and Service Packs. Why not get used to it now?

    --
    US Democracy:The best person for the job (among These pre-selected choices...)
  15. Wait a second... by iamzack · · Score: 3, Funny

    What is this E-bay?

  16. It never was. by Fortran+IV · · Score: 5, Informative

    Microsoft's Passport sign-on was never a single-entry system, even within Microsoft's sites. Not long ago they started requiring a Passport account to post to the MS support newsgroups, so I reactivated an old Hotmail account. Surprise! Logging on to Passport thru their newsgroups did not get me into Hotmail; I had to enter the Passport account and password individually for each system, whether I entered them sequentially or simultaneously thru two browser windows.

    As usual, Microsoft paid as little attention to their proposed standard systems as the rest of the industry. (Remember, Windows Notepad didn't get the Ctrl-O and Ctrl-S shortcuts until Windows 2000, even though other MS programs had them in Windows 3.x.)

    --
    I figure by 2030 or so my 6-digit UID will be something to brag about.
  17. Bad idea, implementation irrelevant. by Tackhead · · Score: 5, Insightful
    > The idea is not that bad - instead of thousands of sites and message boards requiring registration, login and confirmation of the e-mail, have just one single entity provide and verify the virtual avatar.

    Bad idea, implementation irrelevant.

    Instead of having to compromise each site (presumably on a semi-secure server), have just one single entity provide and verify the virutal avatar... based on data resident on a machine administered so incompetently as to have six types of spyware and four spammer worms on it because the underlying operating system is as secure as swiss cheese.

    > Small sites who would benefit frim such service don't have $10,000 to throw around, and large sites, which do have the money, just will write their own username+password code.

    ...thereby saving themselves $10K, thereby limiting the damage from compromise to Just One Site, and thereby offering better security to the end user by accident.

    I've lucky in that got a good "mind" for (secure!) passwords and have no trouble remembering dozens of them.

    But even if I didnt... even if I wrote all my userid/password combinations on Post-It notes, a Post-It note resides in an area with reasonably secure physical access controls. Not so with a network-connected PC and a single-signon application.

    1. Re:Bad idea, implementation irrelevant. by grumbel · · Score: 3, Interesting

      ### based on data resident on a machine administered so incompetently...

      That is what I call bad implementation, if done right this whole thing would have worked via smartcards. Have a key stored on that card and encrypt the login information on the card itself, don't store any information on the computer itself. Would have even allowed to move to another computer and login there without risking to get the password spyed away. Good smartcard are ever protected by a pin which you can enter on the card itself, so you don't even need an extra numpad. On the server side all that would be needed would be some standard protocoll to comminucate with the client/smartcard.

      Downside is of course that such smartcard reader would have cost a little bit of money, but given that now basically every PC comes with Flash-, SD-, XD- and whatever they are called slots, such a reader shouldn't have ben all that expensive, especially if Microsoft would have backed it up with a little 'force'.

      Sadly all dreams, and we are stuck for the coming years with passwords and password managers which basically store everything in almost plain-text on the client...

    2. Re:Bad idea, implementation irrelevant. by MagPulse · · Score: 2, Funny

      based on data resident on a machine administered so incompetently as to have six types of spyware and four spammer worms on it because the underlying operating system is as secure as swiss cheese.

      Can you provide a link to a story about this?

    3. Re:Bad idea, implementation irrelevant. by jd · · Score: 2, Interesting
      Kerberos V uses single sign-on and then uses secure tokens to authenticate. It's not a bad idea, provided the information on the client machine for generating/passing tokens isn't compromised.


      Now, it's true that Windows is not exactly the most secure system. Indeed, in recent security tests, it was passed by an unlocked door, and a large neon sign displaying the sensitive data.


      On the other hand, this is definitely the problem with the OS, and not the idea. If you run Kerberos on OpenBSD or a reasonably secure Linux box, the odds of anyone being able to break the system and obtain access to all sites that acknowledge the same Kerberos domain that you are logged into are pretty remote.


      Personally, I think Kerberos is not the best system. It uses DES and CBC for encoding, for a start, and MIT's implementation appears to be hard to modify to support other encryption systems and other chaining modes. I'd prefer a system that is capable of a moderate to high degree of flexibility, as you can't decrypt something if you don't know the encryption algorithm used.


      An alternative system would be to log into some sort of server, which generated seed information for a pseudo one-time pad, which could be generated independently on the client and server.


      When logging into another server, the previous server passes the pad generating information, plus current position in the one-time pad to the new server. Any other tokens are passed as usual. By passing the pad position, you ensure that ONLY your computer can connect to the new server - no other computer, even if the user has your password, tokens, etc, can do so, because it doesn't have either the pad or the position in it.


      Even grabbing the information for generating the pad isn't good enough, because you still don't have the position. The pad isn't re-used, when you connect somewhere else, the pad is always used from where you left off. If N bytes are sent, then the cursor is on the N+1th position of the pad, always. Since the hostile computer cannot prevent the real user's computer from transmitting, the hostile computer cannot ever be certain what N is, and therefore cannot encrypt data in a way the target server will understand.


      This means that you cannot transmit to two servers using this system at the same time, and any switch between server has to be explicit to both the old and new servers. Otherwise, the necessary state information can't be relayed properly.


      However, it's very rare that you ever are interested in being connected to two servers at the same time, except on LANs or point-to-point multi-user software. You wouldn't use these sorts of schemes to protect LANs anyway, and multi-machine multi-user software should use multicasting, not point-to-point.

      --
      It's a small world and it smells funny; I'd buy another if it wasn't for the money; Take back what I paid (SoM)
    4. Re:Bad idea, implementation irrelevant. by Qzukk · · Score: 2, Insightful

      Have a key stored on that card and encrypt the login information on the card itself, don't store any information on the computer itself.

      This would have worked for about 30 minutes before someone would have modified a worm to spy on the smartcard-reading-process.

      --
      If I have been able to see further than others, it is because I bought a pair of binoculars.
    5. Re:Bad idea, implementation irrelevant. by gad_zuki! · · Score: 2, Insightful

      There's no way I'm carrying a card around to log into some phpBB board.

      Password managers are a pretty ideal solution. People tend to have a super-secret password for their bank account and crap passwords for noisy boards. My browser does a good job at storing them.

      This is a solution looking for a problem more than anything.

  18. Only Microsoft stuff is widely used by Myria · · Score: 3, Insightful

    Passport does have a lot of users, but only for Microsoft stuff. MSN, Hotmail, and Xbox Live, all very popular, use Passport.

    (Xbox Live's case is a little more complicated, but it does use Passport at its core.)

    Melissa

    --
    "Screw Sun, cross-platform will never work. Let's move on and steal the Java language." - Visual J++ Product Manager
  19. about bloody time by pluke · · Score: 2, Informative

    That .NET Passport signin broke for me the first time i used it with ebay and then i was unable to set up an ebay account for an entire month.

    --
    "all through my house i set up traps, it seems like the rats have a map, so now i feed the rats crack" - Donald D
  20. Just goes to show... by SteeldrivingJon · · Score: 4, Insightful

    Microsoft can trot out a list of companies participating in their latest 'innovation', but no matter how many companies sign up at the start, it really says nothing about the eventual likely success or failure of the system.

    Too many people (especially pundits) see such a list and take it as irrefutable evidence that the thing in question is destined to take over the industry.

    --
    September 2011: Looking for Cocoa/iOS work in Boston area Cocoa Programmer Quincy, MA
  21. Hubris, thy name is Microsoft by doodleboy · · Score: 4, Insightful

    Somehow Microsoft failed to consider that

    1) with their record of bad faith toward their own customers and their ongoing security lapses, most knowledgeable end users would not trust Microsoft to manage their personal information, and

    2) with their record of bad faith toward their own business partners and their ongoing security lapses, online retailers wouldn't relish the extra burden of sending a monthly tithe to Microsoft.

    Luckily Microsoft makes bazillions off Windows and Office and can throw a couple billion here and there on various schemes--gaming, set top boxes, what have you. They know as well as anyone that the commoditization of operating systems and productivity software is underway and they won't be able to maintain their margins forever. If they don't find a cash cow soon they'll be forced to (horrors!) make less money.

  22. It never worked anyways, and eBay didn't care. by Schmucky+The+Cat · · Score: 2, Interesting
    It never worked anyways.

    I tried to use it multiple times. I'd be logged into MSN, MSN Messenger, reading hotmail, and in some new window (using IE, even) I'd try to log into eBay and, nope, same page, repeatedly, asking for the username and password.

    I'd have liked for it to work, but I don't think anyone at eBay ever actually cared whether it worked.

  23. Some don't want a hotmail-account by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 4, Informative

    I think some people are scared away because they believe that you need a hotmail-account to have a Passport. Not everybody want yet another useless, spam-filled webmail address.
    The fact is that you can use your regular email with Passport, but I think alot of people believe these two services to be the same.

    Maybe MS just need to relaunch the service. When it was created, Joe Average didn't have a gazillion different passwords. Things have changed since then.

  24. lol $10,000. a ROFLMAO Year? by CrazyJim0 · · Score: 3, Interesting

    I wrote a login/password script with no effort in less than an hour. The hardest part is getting an internet protocol compatible programming language, and actually writing your application.

    What they were asking is like holding the door open for someone then asking for a hundred spot.

    Passport not only had security flaws, but would be the biggest target ever imagined for phishing scams. Its funny too because the passport URL was so long that you didn't even see the www.microsoft part. You could have sent them to any site to login, and just kept their login and passport.

    Microsoft failures are great for jokes.

  25. One account for EVERYTHING... no thanks! by turrican · · Score: 5, Insightful

    The thought of a single web-based logon for access to so many different entities kinda scares me... Especially once it spans across companies.

    It's sometimes irritating to remember a number of different logons/passwords, and maybe I'm just paranoid, but I prefer the compartmentalization that separate logons brings.

  26. Hmm... GoogleLogins anyone? by WoTG · · Score: 2, Insightful

    The Passport concept was, and still is good. I never gave MS's attempt a real chance, because I was annoyed of programs like MSN Messenger and XP Remote Assistance bugging/requiring me to get an account.

    Anyway, the idea of a simple username+passport system for the 99% of websites where we care about security "a little" does exist. I think Passport was overengineered. I suspect that a most people will NEVER trust their bank passwords to the same system that holds their Slashdot passwords. Without that level of security, a lot of the engineering and compliance testing and associated costs aren't necessary.

    I would imagine that "all" that's needed is a big database, some public key system, and a client-side tool to fill in the login forms. It's not THAT tricky.

    I'm imagining someone like Google being able to offer this with relative ease. The GoogleToolbar can handle the client-side for automatic logins, or each site can provide an alternate manual login form. Google can easily handle the distributed database and web services stuff. And the free publicity would be excellent - a lot of smaller sites already have Google Logos for their site search, adding one on the login forms is probably reasonable.

  27. Yes, yes it is and here's why by Weaselmancer · · Score: 3, Funny

    Is Microsoft's Single Sign-On vision edging towards oblivion?

    Yes, the MS single sign on is going away and here's why. Anyone from Redmond reading this, listen up.

    Microsoft is not the Internet.

    I know, I know it's hard to believe...but it's true. The online community is actually *much larger* than Microsoft's vision for it.

    This is why "embrace and extend" (and then make incompatible) keeps failing as a strategy.

    --
    Weaselmancer
    rediculous.
    1. Re:Yes, yes it is and here's why by ajp · · Score: 2, Funny

      Likewise, Slashdot is NOT the computer marketplace. Which is why anyone from Redmond reading this doesn't give a crap.

      As for me, I would like a reasonable and optional single signon. Yes, I have a passport because my nephew uses Messenger and they made me get one for that. But I also have a bunch of low-security usernames and passwords. My slashdot ID, for example, is protected with a weak password. Go ahead. Crack it. Ruin my life.

  28. One compromise, multiple 0wnz by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 4, Funny


    I hope not, I so liked the idea of having one login that if compromised would allow access to multiple sites for multiple micheiveous activities. This is why I used my .NET passport like I use the air I breathe, all the time.

    Please say it ain't so! How else can I be throroughly humiliated with just one account being cracked?

  29. Bad idea anyway. by AnotherBlackHat · · Score: 3, Insightful

    I don't want my password to be stored on a computer.
    If I did, I would want it to be my computer.
    If I didn't want it to be my computer, I wouldn't want it to be on a computer I had to pay for.
    And even if I were willing to pay for the inconvience of having someone else be in control of my passwords, I wouldn't want that person to be Microsoft.

    Passport was based on a flaw premise;
    The reason we don't provide personal information to every site that asks for it isn't because it's too hard to type it in.

    -- Should you believe authority without question?

  30. How do I become a .NET Passport Site? by nmoog · · Score: 3, Informative

    Certainly looks like MS have had enough of .NET Passport... Mouseover the "How do I become a .NET Passport Site?" on the directory site and it shows "http://www.microsoft.com/net/services/passport", but click it and your redirected to "http://www.microsoft.com/NET/default.aspx" with not a mention of .NET Passport.

    1. Re:How do I become a .NET Passport Site? by RupW · · Score: 2, Informative

      Mouseover the "How do I become a .NET Passport Site?" on the directory site and it shows "http://www.microsoft.com/net/services/passport", but click it and your redirected to "http://www.microsoft.com/NET/default.aspx" with not a mention of .NET Passport.

      I don't think the docs have ever been there - looks to me like they're putting that site together but put it live before they finished it yet. The best link to follow is the Getting started link on the passport front page.

      The Passport docs have been stale for some time. The download contains a *way* out of date configuration file and I think the code to refresh it is hosed to - you have to jump through hoops to update it manually.

  31. lets see by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 2, Funny

    how about i let a convicted corporate crimminal hold all my personal information, including user name & password, creditcard names/expiration dates/account numbers...

    does that sound like a good idea to you???

    it would be a really really cold day in hell before i let the likes of a greedy corporation such as M$FT have any of my personal info...

  32. MSDN subscribers required to use Passport by alc6379 · · Score: 3, Interesting

    ...And it stinks.

    I've got a Passport because of my MSDN subscripton, and it's the only reason why I've got Microsoft Instant Messenger running on my system. But, it NEVER WORKS-- IE is supposed to realize you're signed in with your passport, and let you right on through to subscriber downloads, but that never happens. Everytime, I'm forced to sign in, and then hit the "I Agree" button to the MSDN Subscriber Agreement each time, as if I'm signing in for the very first time, every time.

    Sure, that might be lazy to not want to be hassled by those few key/mouse clicks, but if you're going to implement a feature and then require your subscribers to use that feature, at least make the feature work. After all, that was supposed to be the reason for Passport integration into XP, right? Just sign into Messenger, and then you'll be recognized at any .NET Passport enabled site?

    --
    I don't moderate anymore. Karma penalty for 90% fair mods? Can I mod that unfair?
  33. Re:May I be the first to say... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 2, Insightful

    The ebay article doesn't give a reason for the retirement. Though lack of interest could be the obvious reason. There is also the possibility of ebay not wanting to link to their next major competitor. We all know that Bill get's up every morning and asks "W W W on the wall who is moving in on me owning it all?"

  34. Emperor Bill's 19th bid for world rule fails... by leonbrooks · · Score: 2, Funny

    ...film at eleven.

    So, what's he going to do next? Build ShortHorn into every telephone?

    --
    Got time? Spend some of it coding or testing
  35. They are bad by david+einstein · · Score: 2, Insightful

    The people at Microsoft are such bullies.. Now give me a bunch of points for being insightful or i'll beat the shit out of you. Now don't tell anyone we had this conversation

  36. Re:As if by upsidedown_duck · · Score: 2, Funny

    I'll let you guess at how much we told them was implemented or fixed...

    17.3%? Too high?

    --
    -- "Makes Little Debbie look like a pile of puke!" - Moe Szyslak
  37. Re:Why should Ebay play along? by venkatu · · Score: 2, Funny
    this is what comes to mind ...
    "One World, One Web, One Program" - Microsoft Ad
    "Ein Volk, Ein Reich, Ein Fuhrer" - Adolf Hitler
    man whoever that put this together is just a genius ;-)
  38. sol'n: EMAIL/IM passwords for each login by majid_aldo · · Score: 2, Insightful

    email and IM; authenticate using them. this is happening already when you click "forgot password?" and the password is sent to your email. so, in effect your email password is like your only password. changing you email password is kind of like changing ALL your passwords.

    why?
    the only common communication channel on the internet is email and -a bit less so- IM.
    eg.: each time you sign on to a site you can get a different password for each time you log in via email or IM.

    --
    --- widget evolution: enhanced, plus, super, ultra, extreme, exxxtreme, ultra-extreme, ..etc.
  39. Bizarre side-effect by GregWebb · · Score: 2, Funny

    When I saw this, I thought 'hang on, I can now register for an account!'. No, hang on, this makes sense...

    Much of my office communicates using MSN Messenger. I don't like it but never mind... I had never signed up for an account because, with Passport around, I didn't want to provide them with the slightest additional encouragement and blip in their userbase statistics that might help persuade another site to join their unholy alliance. Now that possibility appears thoroughly dead, I can sign up for one in peace and be able to send quick messages to colleagues more efficiently than through e-mail.

    --

    Greg

    (Inside a nuclear plant)
    Aaaarrrggh! Run! The canary has mutated!

  40. Only 200 comments on this article by kraksmoka · · Score: 2, Funny

    proves that passport is so dead nobody even cares to flame it anymore! yaay!

    --
    "You never want a serious crisis to go to waste." - Rahm Emanuel
  41. Does anyone understand Passport? by Ath · · Score: 3, Interesting
    Passport was not intended as just an authentication system. That was only one piece for Microsoft. The real benefits eventually would be in all of the data they would collect about you from each of their Passport partners.

    Once you understand how Passport works and would work in the future, it is so clearly a horrible idea that it is not funny. People often only think of it as a central repository for storing their passwords. Some like this idea for its convenience but the Passport model is so half-baked it is not even funny.

    If you want to understand how a truly well-designed system will work, take a look at the Liberty Alliance. Instead of the central repository method, it uses a federated approach to the problem.

    For example, if you have a bank account, a utility provider, and your employer, there is no need for those three entities to share all information about you. It should be up to you to define which information is shared, but you should only have to maintain it in one place.

    If your employer knows your home address, why not allow this data to be shared automatically to the other entities? Don't want to? Then you don't have to. You employer may know your bank account number to deposit your salary. Your utility provider may know your bank account number to deduct your monthly bill. Why not tell your bank to share this information with your employer and utility provider? If you change your bank, then your new bank will automatically update this information.

    Of course all of this has to be done in a secure way. But it is more likely that your bank will have secure connections to other entities than the layer where you inform those entities yourself.

    Best of all, the approach from the Liberty Alliance does not leave one vendor with the master key. The keys are still with you, you just might give certain keys to some of your vendors.

    1. Re:Does anyone understand Passport? by Ath · · Score: 2, Interesting
      Do you have a source for this?

      I did not say that Passport sent passwords to the third party sites. I said that people think of Passport as a central repository for storing their passwords. By implication, I was pointing out that this is incorrect.

      Yes, Passport authenticates you by sending a secure token to the third party and the third party trusts Passport.

      My point was that the Passport architecture is inherently flawed because it allows an independent source (the Passport system) to authenticate you to the third party. The third party then assumes whoever Passport just authenticated is the full user. That is a flawed architecture because it uses a centralized trusted source for authentication to all third parties (at least, that was Microsoft's goal). The third party no longer has any restrictions on accessing it once Passport has authenticated. The problem gets exponentially worse as more systems use Passport.

      Take the scenario where Passport is breached. Any system that uses Passport is therefore breached FULLY at the user level. A federated system, on the other hand, still has restriction about what can be supplied and shared between systems. In addition, there is no central system to breach. There is no master key. It is only a web of systems sharing information as defined.

      So technically Passport does not store passwords, but it might as well. The result is the same.