<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?><rss version="2.0"
	xmlns:content="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/content/"
	xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/"
	xmlns:atom="http://www.w3.org/2005/Atom"
	xmlns:sy="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/syndication/"
		>
<channel>
	<title>Comments on: OpenID deserves to die</title>
	<atom:link href="http://www.matusiak.eu/numerodix/blog/index.php/2008/05/27/openid-deserves-to-die/feed/" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml" />
	<link>http://www.matusiak.eu/numerodix/blog/index.php/2008/05/27/openid-deserves-to-die/</link>
	<description>A blog about nothing</description>
	<lastBuildDate>Tue, 31 Jan 2012 20:14:03 -0500</lastBuildDate>
	<generator>http://wordpress.org/?v=2.8.6</generator>
	<sy:updatePeriod>hourly</sy:updatePeriod>
	<sy:updateFrequency>1</sy:updateFrequency>
		<item>
		<title>By: Samat Jain</title>
		<link>http://www.matusiak.eu/numerodix/blog/index.php/2008/05/27/openid-deserves-to-die/#comment-116020</link>
		<dc:creator>Samat Jain</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Sat, 24 Oct 2009 10:21:54 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.matusiak.eu/numerodix/blog/?p=1033#comment-116020</guid>
		<description>There are a lot of problems with OpenID, but I&#039;m not following the ones you make.

So, you said the concept died when you needed to put faith into a service provided by some third party provider, or a service you have to provide yourself. I don&#039;t see how this is different than anything else on the Internet... particularly e-mail. Most people use a 3rd party provider for e-mail, and those who do not want to trust those providers (including myself) host their entire e-mail stack themselves. If you&#039;re comfortable with the way e-mail works on the Internet, then you should be comfortable with the way OpenID works. (This touches a legitimate OpenID problem: it does authentication, not identification, so it does nothing to prevent abuse from spammers. That&#039;s another topic, however).

I don&#039;t know about you, but I have a lot of logins. With OpenID, I only need to remember my authentication with my OpenID provider, something that I would use so frequently that it&#039;d be difficult to forget. Because it&#039;s centralized and I only have one to remember, I can change also it&#039;s credentials more often and do all those good security practices that few ever actually do.

Now, onto the real benefit of OpenID: it&#039;s a framework. It puts a lot of power in the hands of the provider, but that&#039;s the point. That provider (which you can control) can perform any kind of whacked-out challenge to verify you imaginable. Some things that exist today (or could exist):

Verify a user by some second factor, such as an RSA SecurID token, or a browser certificate (done by Verisign&#039;s PIP).

Verify a user by a key file stored on their computer, such as their GPG key. Provider could leverage something like FireGPG and GpgAuth.

Verify a user by their fingerprint or some other biometric. Provider could interact with some other software controlling another authentication device.

So, the point is, OpenID is a lot better than anything else we&#039;re doing now, and it enables sophistication and better security.

Yes, all of the above could be done with some kind of fat client (i.e. in-browser) password manager, but guess what, we&#039;ve had decades to do it and no one has come up with a good solution (and it&#039;s still not secure---the weakest link is still the password!).</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>There are a lot of problems with OpenID, but I&#8217;m not following the ones you make.</p>
<p>So, you said the concept died when you needed to put faith into a service provided by some third party provider, or a service you have to provide yourself. I don&#8217;t see how this is different than anything else on the Internet&#8230; particularly e-mail. Most people use a 3rd party provider for e-mail, and those who do not want to trust those providers (including myself) host their entire e-mail stack themselves. If you&#8217;re comfortable with the way e-mail works on the Internet, then you should be comfortable with the way OpenID works. (This touches a legitimate OpenID problem: it does authentication, not identification, so it does nothing to prevent abuse from spammers. That&#8217;s another topic, however).</p>
<p>I don&#8217;t know about you, but I have a lot of logins. With OpenID, I only need to remember my authentication with my OpenID provider, something that I would use so frequently that it&#8217;d be difficult to forget. Because it&#8217;s centralized and I only have one to remember, I can change also it&#8217;s credentials more often and do all those good security practices that few ever actually do.</p>
<p>Now, onto the real benefit of OpenID: it&#8217;s a framework. It puts a lot of power in the hands of the provider, but that&#8217;s the point. That provider (which you can control) can perform any kind of whacked-out challenge to verify you imaginable. Some things that exist today (or could exist):</p>
<p>Verify a user by some second factor, such as an RSA SecurID token, or a browser certificate (done by Verisign&#8217;s PIP).</p>
<p>Verify a user by a key file stored on their computer, such as their GPG key. Provider could leverage something like FireGPG and GpgAuth.</p>
<p>Verify a user by their fingerprint or some other biometric. Provider could interact with some other software controlling another authentication device.</p>
<p>So, the point is, OpenID is a lot better than anything else we&#8217;re doing now, and it enables sophistication and better security.</p>
<p>Yes, all of the above could be done with some kind of fat client (i.e. in-browser) password manager, but guess what, we&#8217;ve had decades to do it and no one has come up with a good solution (and it&#8217;s still not secure&#8212;the weakest link is still the password!).</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: J</title>
		<link>http://www.matusiak.eu/numerodix/blog/index.php/2008/05/27/openid-deserves-to-die/#comment-88571</link>
		<dc:creator>J</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Mon, 22 Dec 2008 18:48:37 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.matusiak.eu/numerodix/blog/?p=1033#comment-88571</guid>
		<description>I like the idea of OpenID. Just in practice it is not working so well.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>I like the idea of OpenID. Just in practice it is not working so well.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Dirk R. Gently</title>
		<link>http://www.matusiak.eu/numerodix/blog/index.php/2008/05/27/openid-deserves-to-die/#comment-58950</link>
		<dc:creator>Dirk R. Gently</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Thu, 29 May 2008 15:09:58 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.matusiak.eu/numerodix/blog/?p=1033#comment-58950</guid>
		<description>I also have problems with openid.  First I think it needs to be on a centralized server.  Yeah, you can use your own but how many people besides us geeks do.  Also I could never trust the security.  Centralized login/passwords are what it&#039;s all about and it&#039;s a good idea but how secure are they?

If you need OpenID cause you use multiple pc&#039;s - get a laptop!</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>I also have problems with openid.  First I think it needs to be on a centralized server.  Yeah, you can use your own but how many people besides us geeks do.  Also I could never trust the security.  Centralized login/passwords are what it&#8217;s all about and it&#8217;s a good idea but how secure are they?</p>
<p>If you need OpenID cause you use multiple pc&#8217;s &#8211; get a laptop!</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
</channel>
</rss>

