Slashdot Mirror


MySpace Joins OpenID Coalition

the4thdimension writes "MySpace has joined a coalition of other big-name e-services in support of OpenID. If you aren't familiar with the OpenID coalition, they are a group that seeks to allow users to create a single account/password set to be used on a number of services. Such services already signed up include: Google's Blogger, Wordpress, AOL, Yahoo, Vox, LiveJournal, and others." Reader gbjbaanb adds a link to the BBC's coverage and points out that MySpace's 100 million users would mean nearly a doubling of the approximately 120 million OpenID accounts now in use, writing: "Initially support is to use MySpace OpenIDs as providers only — i.e. you cannot logon to MySpace with an OpenID created elsewhere, but that policy will change in the future. This should help to make OpenID the de-facto login mechanism for the Internet, now if only Microsoft would support it, there are plenty OSS OpenID libraries available."

11 of 272 comments (clear)

  1. Defeat the purpose? by kgwilliam · · Score: 5, Insightful

    "Initially support is to use MySpace OpenIDs as providers only -- i.e. you cannot logon to MySpace with an OpenID created elsewhere" Ummm.... Doesn't that sortof defeat the purpose of a single username/password system? You have to create an OpenID for MySpace, and then you have to create a different OpenID for site XYZ. How many other sites are going to require that you create a new OpenID for their site?

    1. Re:Defeat the purpose? by CastrTroy · · Score: 5, Insightful

      What I don't get about OpenID is that it seems to give my OpenID provider access to every site I log onto. As much trouble as it is having to manage hundreds of logins, I don't think the proper solution is to proxy all my logins to some third party.

      --

      Anthropic principle: We see the universe the way it is because if it were different we would not be here to see it.
    2. Re:Defeat the purpose? by Wolfger · · Score: 5, Insightful

      Absolutely. This is why OpenID is going nowhere fast. Everybody wants to be a provider, but virtually nobody wants to accept OpenID credentials from other sites. LJ does, and to my surprise Identi.ca has since day one, but most "OpenID sites" are providers only. It's sad, and makes baby Stallman cry.

    3. Re:Defeat the purpose? by maxume · · Score: 5, Interesting

      You are free to be your own OpenID provider (there is no guarantee that all consumers will accept your ID, but you could probably proxy an acceptable provider to your own endpoint).

      For the vast majority of people, their email provider already has access to many of their logins, so it isn't necessarily a new issue.

      --
      Nerd rage is the funniest rage.
    4. Re:Defeat the purpose? by Chyeld · · Score: 5, Interesting

      It doesn't. And you aren't.

      Implemented properly, OpenID works thusly:

      You tell a site that you are "JimBob" of "random URL". The site goes to the random URL, which has listed (somewhere, there is more than one way to provide the information) a server that is authorized to authenticate that you are truely "JimBob" of "random URL".

      The site then goes to the authentication server, passes control to it for you to authenticate, and waits to be told who you are. The authentication server does it's jig and passes back the results.

      The idea is, if you decide to change authentication servers, or even roll your own, you have control over "random URL" and thus can change what server is being listed as the 'offical' authenticator for "JimBob" of "random URL".

      This provides you ultimate control, and you aren't passing anything to anyone that you haven't choosen to trust.

      The problem is, at least for me, is almost all of these big name companies are providers (i.e. authenticators) and not consumers. On top of it, I haven't had any luck on getting these providers setup as authenticators for anything other than their own domains. I.E. I can be JimBob at Yahoo.com, and JimBob at Blogger.com, and JimBob at Facebook.com, but I can't set any of them up to authenticate me as "JimBob" of "random URL". Which completely destroys any utility of their membership in this group.

  2. Blah Blah Blah... by anom · · Score: 5, Insightful

    Until you actually let someone authenticate to your site using OpenID, you're not really helping anything. You're just spreading BS about how open you are when you're really just supporting further centralization around yourself. Until the big names start acting as Relying Parties, I don't wanna hear about it.

  3. Re:Mixed up Facebook and Myspace in TFS by LighterShadeOfBlack · · Score: 5, Funny

    ...pointing out that...

    Wow, proof-reading really is that hard.

    --
    Spelling mistakes, grammatical errors, and stupid comments are intentional.
  4. Re:Anonymous SSO? by thrillseeker · · Score: 5, Informative

    The openid protocol allows you to limit the information given to the system you're logging into to a minimum of "authenticated" - that is, no additional; information such as a (verified) email address is passed, though one is still required for an openid account establishment. It's up to the requesting system whether that minimal information is sufficient. Of course, your IP address can still be captured unless you use an anonymizing proxy.

  5. Re:Problem by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 5, Informative

    So pick an OpenID provider that uses something more secure than a single password. There are providers that use hardware tokens, OTP's, etc.

  6. A Major Advantage You're Missing by floateyedumpi · · Score: 5, Interesting

    All the concern about too many eggs in one basket is certainly valid. However, one major advantage of a centralized login system is being missed here: the ability to change all of one's password easily on a somewhat regular basis. As it stands now, I have so many accounts, many of which use the same password, some of which use variations of that password, etc., that the notion of going through and changing all those passwords is completely daunting. Hence, I never do it.

    With openID, every time I got a bit nervous, I could change the one true password, and still have to remember only it. A good openID provider could even give reminders or enforce a password expiration, which would go from extreme nuisance when done on an individual site basis, to real additional security, potentially offsetting the loss of security inherent in the single point of failure for many users.

  7. Re:OpenID? by phoenix.bam! · · Score: 5, Informative

    I don't think you understand how openid works. The only way to compromise all sites is for your openid provider to be compromised. You only provide 3rd party sites with a URL which points to your openid provider. You are forwarded to your openid provider (SSL cert verifies to you that the provider is legit.) You enter your credentials to the openid provider who then sends over a back channel that you are verified back to the 3rd party site. At no time does the 3rd party site have any of your authentication credentials and therefore can not access anything on other sites which you use that openid account for.