Microsoft Loses Passport

nikkoslack copies and pastes: "Microsoft is abandoning one of its most controversial attempts to dominate the Internet after rival companies banded together to oppose it and consumers failed to embrace it. The Redmond software company said Wednesday it would stop trying to persuade Web sites to use its Passport service, which stores consumers' credit-card and other information as Internet users surf from place to place."

Comments

no trust... no passport

[AlexTheBeast]

Nobody believes that Microsoft focuses on security. Nobody.

That is the reason that the passport system failed. The general computer using public is not
really tech-knowledgable... however, they do know that credit card numbers are to be protected.

(Of course, they don't realize that all of this spyware s!ht they have installed could
grab their numbers just as easily.)

Hopefully, Microsoft will turn off
that damn reminder balloon now.

Re:no trust... no passport

[turnstyle]

"Nobody believes that Microsoft focuses on security. Nobody. That is the reason that the passport system failed. The general computer using public is not really tech-knowledgable."

Your logic kind of cancels itself out. You are correct that the bulk of the public isn't tech-knowledgable -- and so I'd say that it's safe to say that they didn't avoid Microsoft's Passport for security reasons.

(after all, do they avoid Microsoft's OSes for security reasons?)

Passport mostly failed because those masses didn't "get it" and didn't care to.

Re:no trust... no passport

[Foofoobar]

Actually there are multiple reasons why the public didn't get it and it boils down to the public and the industry avoiding it because of the following:

1. monopoly - nobody wants to give all their id's to one company to control

2. lack of understanding - why do I need one company to have my login and password to use on all these sites when I, Joe Average, already use the same login and password on all these sites?

3. security - Seriously, would you trust them with your login, pass, personal info and credit card information when they have had such a flawless run on security?

Because of one of those three things (or a combination thereof), it failed. These are (oddly enough) the same stumbling blocks that continue to stump them with all product releases. In some ways, it would have been in Microsoft's best interest's to split the company either via the courts or themselves; in that sense, the baggage of the company would not follow every product. By splitting the company, the could effectively put a new face behind each branch and each child company would have a chance to remarket themselves and their products.

On a negative, this would make it so that they would then have to compete more fairly in an open market and thus would cost them a share. It's give and take and right now no matter how you cut it microsoft loses.

Re:no trust... no passport

[Richy_T]

Your friend should be storing passwords with one-way encryption such that he couldn't tell what they are anyway. Anything else is just asking to be hacked, have the passwords stolen then be liable for all the mischief that gets caused.

Rich

Passport's failure

[turnstyle]

I think "rival companies banded together to oppose it" was far less relevant than "consumers failed to embrace it"

Re:Passport's failure

[Kierthos]

I would tend to think that "Consumers didn't know it was there" would also be a major part of it. You can't "embrace" what you don't know about.

Kierthos

Re:Passport's failure

[Kierthos]

And how many of them ignored it every time they saw it? And how many of those Hotmail accounts were created and used solely as throw-away e-mail accounts for any other page that required an e-mail address? Or for a spam-bot? Or for any other reason to create and never actually sign in?

Do you even look at the advertisements that are put in your way on the way to whatever article is the reference in a Slashdot story? When was the last time you paid attention to a commercial on TV?

Yes, it wasn't trusted by people. Yes, it wasn't trusted by web-site based businesses. But even with SP2, XP still has security holes. And there are a number of problems with Word, Powerpoint, and every other Microsoft product. And yet people use and trust those products to do what they are supposed to. Because they were marketed correctly. Passport wasn't marketed correctly. It was barely marketed at all.

Kierthos

A few years down the line ...

[Anonymous Coward]

/tinfoil hat on

Microsoft will embrace the Libery Alliance's Passport service. Windows users will embrace it too because it will be ported into the kernel.

Few years later, Microsoft will modify the protocol to extend it, adding their own proprietary features. Windows users have no choice but to embrace it.

Microsoft will then lock out competitors from using their new version of Passport. They might even patent parts of it. In the end they will end up dominating the Passport buisness anyways.

/tinfoil hat off

MS Shot Self in Foot

[phaln]

When Microsoft continued to leave "security" off its list of "necessary items" to follow up on for years, they pretty much shot any hopes of controlling a unified authentication system out the door.

Nobody takes them seriously as far as security goes. Just reading the headlines for a day would make that abundantly clear.

Perhaps a competitor will come out with a clean record and a compelling product, but in this area it isn't going to be Microsoft, if anyone.

A better system would be...

[ThinkTiM]

a public/private key scheme where public registrars keep your key. You keep your list of credit cards and identities on YOUR own devices. You then send encrypted information containing your credit card or identity in an industry standard packet of encyrpted information along with a link to the registrar.

Lost the battle, but war is not over

[nurb432]

They will be back. They have the time and the funds to punt on this..

But they are not done...Total domination takes time.. They learned that lesson with java and the web in general...

Noble cause

[confusion]

The idea behind passport, at least partly, was a good idea in making the internet a little more consistant and easier to use for the herds of everyday people. The big problem is that when a company like MS forges a solution, its going to have strings attached and a financial motivation to pressure companies to do things they don't want to do.

I still think the idea is valid, but the implementation and execution, in true MS form, left a lot to be desired.

One login is easy for identity theft.

[Yaa 101]

Let me have my 1000's of different logins as you can't imagine what happens when your only identity online get's compromised.
Imagine the work you need to pick up the pieces, this after all the work you need to make sure that the theft's impact remains small...

People that buy in on a single net identity are not so smart it seems...

Re:Downfall?

[east coast]

Wow, it's looking bad for MS. Firefox, IE exploits, linux sneaking up on them, and their attempt to be big brother now fails too.

The truth is that it failed long ago and it just took this long for it to swing around. As for the rest? I've been hearing for years and years how Linux and open source was going to crush MS to a pulp. At the current pace it'll happen right around the year 2112.

And I'm not being trollish. Let's at least accept the fact that when you're in a biased community like Slashdot you're going to see things with a heavy slant. Joe Sixpack STILL hasn't embraced open source, cares little about it and is even less inclined to learning a new OS, free or not. Not to even factor in the school system. Once I see a serious move to Linux in accessible schools like state universities, community colleges and the free public schooling system maybe there will be something there.

Re:Misconceptions

[s7uar7]

Coupled with the cost, that 2nd point will be the reason there was such a low take-up by 3rd party sites. Companies use your registration details for far more than just letting you in to the site - giving demographics to advertisers for example. If they're going to allow logins from clients with no details, they may as well do away with the registration all together.

Another take on why it failed...

[Cloud K]

People don't like being nagged, and when nagged many have a tendency to do the opposite.

Myself, my father, my mother all had to go through the same thing. "Please create a passport" "OK, wtf is a passport and why do I want it?" *click* (lots of marketing mumbo jumbo that Joe Average has to make an effort to read (a big no-no). *click "later" or whatever*

Next reboot "Please create a passport!!11one!" - at this point you start to get mildly irritated. "I told you last time - now if I find I have the need for a Passport I'll come get one! Go away!"

Next reboot "Please create a passport OR ELSE!!!" - now you start to get pissed off. Stop nagging, I hate things that nag especially computers, go-the-heck-away. Now you make a conscious effort to *avoid* learning about Passport. This is where MS go wrong. What they should have done is made it so that you *want* to learn about Passport - not so that you hate it so much before you even know what it does that you never want to see it again.

Next reboot - "Your desktop is untidy. Clean it up please" - at this point you either a) Bend over and do what it says, b) Go to a tech tip site and learn how to turn *off* all the stupid naggy things that try to tell you want to do, c) Format and install Linux or d) Put the Dell in the bin and buy a Mac.

I seriously hope when Longhorn comes out they look at some of the simple Human-Computer Interaction guidelines like "don't try to make the computer (sorry I forgot the word... androsomething... where it acts like a human)" and "don't nag". Nagging = bad impression of product.