IRC Log for #openid on 2009-09-08

Timestamps are in UTC.

  1. [00:58:35] * mosites (n=mosites@static-98-112-71-211.lsanca.dsl-w.verizon.net) Quit ("Streamy (http://www.streamy.com/)")
  2. [01:06:49] * tbbrown (n=tom@doc-209-33-85-251.kingwood.tx.cebridge.net) has joined #openid
  3. [01:38:44] * shigeta (n=shigeta@sakkgw2.sixapart.jp) has joined #openid
  4. [01:57:21] * Armen (n=armen@bas1-montreal19-1177815778.dsl.bell.ca) has joined #openid
  5. [04:22:05] * shigeta (n=shigeta@sakkgw2.sixapart.jp) Quit (Read error: 110 (Connection timed out))
  6. [04:43:49] * shigeta (n=shigeta@sakkgw2.sixapart.jp) has joined #openid
  7. [05:03:45] * shigeta (n=shigeta@sakkgw2.sixapart.jp) Quit ("Leaving...")
  8. [05:38:23] * shigeta (n=shigeta@sakkgw2.sixapart.jp) has joined #openid
  9. [07:01:44] * thesmith (n=bens@78-86-7-25.zone2.bethere.co.uk) has joined #openid
  10. [07:19:12] * jochen (n=jochen@router.begen1.office.netnoc.eu) has joined #openid
  11. [07:59:49] * ponchopilate (n=markthom@host81-137-232-55.in-addr.btopenworld.com) has joined #openid
  12. [08:08:54] * flaccid (n=flaccid@unaffiliated/flaccid) Quit ()
  13. [08:44:51] * daedeloth (n=daedelot@ip-81-11-174-103.dsl.scarlet.be) has joined #openid
  14. [09:01:38] * hillsy (n=shhi2@npfit3.dh.bytemark.co.uk) has joined #openid
  15. [09:48:25] * daedeloth (n=daedelot@ip-81-11-174-103.dsl.scarlet.be) Quit (Remote closed the connection)
  16. [10:45:55] * xpo (n=xpo@bearstech/xpo) has joined #openid
  17. [10:45:55] * daedeloth (n=daedelot@ip-81-11-174-103.dsl.scarlet.be) has joined #openid
  18. [11:26:53] * josephholsten (n=josephho@ip70-189-108-199.ok.ok.cox.net) Quit ()
  19. [11:27:26] * thesmith (n=bens@78-86-7-25.zone2.bethere.co.uk) Quit ()
  20. [11:40:33] * thesmith (n=bens@78-86-7-25.zone2.bethere.co.uk) has joined #openid
  21. [11:46:37] * daedeloth (n=daedelot@ip-81-11-174-103.dsl.scarlet.be) Quit (Remote closed the connection)
  22. [11:48:18] * MrTopf (n=cs@p5B3966EB.dip.t-dialin.net) has joined #openid
  23. [11:55:10] * thesmith_ (n=bens@78-86-7-25.zone2.bethere.co.uk) has joined #openid
  24. [12:03:09] * daedeloth (n=daedelot@ip-81-11-174-103.dsl.scarlet.be) has joined #openid
  25. [12:05:21] * thesmith (n=bens@78-86-7-25.zone2.bethere.co.uk) Quit (Read error: 110 (Connection timed out))
  26. [12:05:41] * daedeloth (n=daedelot@ip-81-11-174-103.dsl.scarlet.be) Quit (Remote closed the connection)
  27. [12:06:09] * daedeloth (n=daedelot@ip-81-11-174-103.dsl.scarlet.be) has joined #openid
  28. [12:20:17] * MacTed (n=Thud@c-24-61-62-241.hsd1.ma.comcast.net) Quit ()
  29. [12:49:30] * daedeloth (n=daedelot@ip-81-11-174-103.dsl.scarlet.be) Quit (Remote closed the connection)
  30. [12:50:13] * daedeloth (n=daedelot@81.11.174.103) has joined #openid
  31. [13:05:07] * daedeloth (n=daedelot@81.11.174.103) Quit (Remote closed the connection)
  32. [13:34:22] * bortzmeyer (n=bortzmey@batilda.nic.fr) has joined #openid
  33. [13:36:44] * shigeta (n=shigeta@sakkgw2.sixapart.jp) Quit ("Leaving...")
  34. [13:46:30] * MacTed (n=Thud@63.119.36.36) has joined #openid
  35. [14:38:10] * karstensrage (n=karstens@c-71-202-243-186.hsd1.ca.comcast.net) Quit ("Leaving")
  36. [14:49:05] * flaccid (n=flaccid@64.136.144.227) has joined #openid
  37. [14:53:58] * qwp0 (n=qwp0@gw.localnet.sk) has joined #openid
  38. [15:07:44] * dwhittle (n=dwhittle@nat/yahoo/x-mkazxnfmsgnjcoqn) has joined #openid
  39. [15:13:59] * bortzmeyer (n=bortzmey@batilda.nic.fr) has left #openid
  40. [15:32:19] * flaccid (n=flaccid@unaffiliated/flaccid) Quit ()
  41. [15:53:24] * flaccid (n=flaccid@209-234-187-210.static.twtelecom.net) has joined #openid
  42. [15:59:44] * daleolds (n=daleolds@137.65.157.9) has joined #openid
  43. [16:02:49] * Kaliya (n=Adium@12.238.61.2) has joined #openid
  44. [16:03:06] * Kaliya (n=Adium@12.238.61.2) has left #openid
  45. [16:12:01] * daedeloth (n=daedelot@ip-81-11-160-7.dsl.scarlet.be) has joined #openid
  46. [16:12:08] * jochen (n=jochen@router.begen1.office.netnoc.eu) Quit (Read error: 113 (No route to host))
  47. [16:24:05] * dwhittle (n=dwhittle@nat/yahoo/x-mkazxnfmsgnjcoqn) Quit ("Im gone.")
  48. [16:30:25] * daleolds (n=daleolds@137.65.157.9) Quit (Remote closed the connection)
  49. [16:52:41] * xpo (n=xpo@bearstech/xpo) Quit ()
  50. [16:58:24] * MrTopf (n=cs@p5B3966EB.dip.t-dialin.net) Quit ()
  51. [17:16:18] * thesmith (n=bens@78-86-7-25.zone2.bethere.co.uk) has joined #openid
  52. [17:18:41] * shigeta (n=shigeta@50.29.100.220.dy.bbexcite.jp) has joined #openid
  53. [17:27:40] * daleolds (n=daleolds@137.65.156.33) has joined #openid
  54. [17:30:43] * thesmith_ (n=bens@78-86-7-25.zone2.bethere.co.uk) Quit (Read error: 110 (Connection timed out))
  55. [17:45:45] * mosites (n=mosites@98.112.71.211) has joined #openid
  56. [17:47:04] * thesmith (n=bens@78-86-7-25.zone2.bethere.co.uk) Quit ()
  57. [17:52:03] * dwhittle (n=dwhittle@209.131.62.113) has joined #openid
  58. [18:03:13] * josephholsten (n=josephho@ip70-189-108-199.ok.ok.cox.net) has joined #openid
  59. [18:04:23] * fizk_ (n=yonas@CPE001a706e7734-CM00111ade9e1c.cpe.net.cable.rogers.com) has joined #openid
  60. [18:04:29] <fizk_> hey guys
  61. [18:04:42] <fizk_> i might've asked this question before, but don't remember the outcome
  62. [18:05:10] <fizk_> i'm looking for a way that a YouTube/MySpace/etc user can prove to me that they own that account
  63. [18:05:48] <fizk_> OpenID will give me a URL that represents that user, but not contain the actual username
  64. [18:06:49] <fizk_> is this being worked on?
  65. [18:06:54] <fizk_> (looked into)
  66. [18:10:04] * xpo (n=xpo@bearstech/xpo) has joined #openid
  67. [18:17:39] <yangman> that's not in the scrope of OpenID
  68. [18:17:49] <yangman> you can try and deduce the user name from the url
  69. [18:18:06] <yangman> or see if maybe it's something you can retrieve from sreg
  70. [18:18:12] <yangman> s/scrope/scope/
  71. [18:23:03] <fizk_> why not expand the scope?
  72. [18:23:23] <yangman> why expand the scope?
  73. [18:23:24] <fizk_> everyone I've talked to believes OpenID should be the solution here
  74. [18:23:39] <fizk_> even tho they don't know much about OpenID, they still have it in their mind that this is the place
  75. [18:24:02] <fizk_> should we create a completely new effort for this one feature?
  76. [18:24:12] * mosites_ (n=mosites@154.sub-75-215-185.myvzw.com) has joined #openid
  77. [18:24:30] <flaccid> fizk_: well that is up to the site and relates to delegation. OpenID proves that a user owns a URL, so this is usually mapped to the local user on the website, so essentially OpenID can already do this.
  78. [18:24:50] <flaccid> fizk_: also was that you who asked about dpkg key the other day ?
  79. [18:25:25] * mosites (n=mosites@98.112.71.211) Quit (Read error: 145 (Connection timed out))
  80. [18:25:25] * mosites_ is now known as mosites
  81. [18:25:25] <fizk_> dpkg...i don't think so
  82. [18:25:47] <fizk_> i remember talking to you tho :)
  83. [18:25:53] <flaccid> sorry must of been someone else
  84. [18:26:37] <fizk_> the mapping isn't standard...I can't parse any URL and extract the original username
  85. [18:26:47] <fizk_> if I could do this, yes, the solution is already there
  86. [18:27:12] <flaccid> but in terms of the other question, the typical scenario is that the user's identity URL has a profile page with their name on it and OpenID auth proves they own the account.
  87. [18:27:18] <fizk_> i guess I'm asking for a standard username => URL mapping
  88. [18:27:27] <fizk_> or username <==> URL mapping
  89. [18:27:53] <flaccid> fizk_: thats not the intention of OpenID because that creates another identifier... for example a new site could use OpenID only for auth, so there is literally only one username which is the URL
  90. [18:29:12] <flaccid> well that standard is the policy of the website. the site may not even have another username. im doing a site right now and essentially it will only use OpenID identifier. you can also look at http://openid.net/specs/openid-authentication-2_0.html#anchor49
  91. [18:29:17] <yangman> and any username retrieved would still be specific to that particular site. making a generic interface to something like that doesn't make much sense
  92. [18:29:36] * mosites_ (n=mosites@154.sub-75-215-185.myvzw.com) has joined #openid
  93. [18:29:51] * mosites (n=mosites@154.sub-75-215-185.myvzw.com) Quit (Read error: 104 (Connection reset by peer))
  94. [18:30:04] * mosites_ is now known as mosites
  95. [18:30:30] <fizk_> it's ok that the username is specific to the site, that's what I'm looking for
  96. [18:30:59] * thesmith (n=bens@78-86-7-25.zone2.bethere.co.uk) has joined #openid
  97. [18:32:37] <flaccid> fizk_: there is nothing stopping a site providing such a service on their website. eg. you enter a URL, the site spits back the username. but i don't know what the point of that would be. most sites/providers etc. use a convention eg. http://username.site.com/ so you can recognise the username by default
  98. [18:32:52] <yangman> in any case, this is provider-specific policy
  99. [18:32:57] <fizk_> flaccid: well, right now, the far majority of sites have account names
  100. [18:33:03] <yangman> and there's already openid.identity
  101. [18:33:27] <fizk_> what's openid.identity
  102. [18:33:29] <flaccid> fizk_: sure. once again its up to the site.
  103. [18:33:58] <yangman> http://openid.net/specs/openid-authentication-2_0.html#anchor27
  104. [18:34:27] <yangman> specifies an identity internal to the provider
  105. [18:37:05] <fizk_> do u know if youtube/google/myspace use the openid.identity field?
  106. [18:38:22] <yangman> don't know
  107. [18:38:55] <fizk_> i'm gonna test 'em right now
  108. [18:38:56] <fizk_> brb
  109. [18:39:19] <fizk_> but even if they do, the standard says it's optional, so i won't be able to rely on it
  110. [18:40:10] <yangman> again, provider-specific
  111. [18:41:17] <yangman> it's there if the provider wants to expose the local username. if it doesn't want any way to expose it, then that's an option, too
  112. [18:42:40] * dwhittle (n=dwhittle@209.131.62.113) Quit ("Im gone.")
  113. [18:44:52] <fizk_> hmmm, yahoo's openid test failed: http://openidenabled.com/resources/openid-test/checkup/start?openid_url=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.yahoo.com
  114. [18:48:45] <fizk_> how can i test against yahoo?
  115. [18:51:55] <yangman> my assumption would be that that's not a valid OpenID URL
  116. [18:53:05] <yangman> ah, n/m, I see
  117. [18:53:42] <yangman> tester must be broken
  118. [18:54:07] * shigeta (n=shigeta@50.29.100.220.dy.bbexcite.jp) Quit ("Leaving...")
  119. [18:54:22] <fizk_> using test-id.org, i get " claimed_id = https://me.yahoo.com/yonas_openid#f74e3"
  120. [18:55:38] <fizk_> i'm not sure if the site would publish openid.identity, tho
  121. [18:55:53] <yangman> yahoo seems to be using a hide-local-identity-by-default policy
  122. [18:56:19] <yangman> 'openid.claimed_id': 'https://me.yahoo.com/a/YuDXieg1uN6F5L5dovMmHMcILA--#5cecc', 'openid.identity': 'https://me.yahoo.com/a/YuDXieg1uN6F5L5dovMmHMcILA--',
  123. [18:56:26] <fizk_> ah ha!
  124. [18:56:50] <yangman> you can set it to use https://me.yahoo.com/username
  125. [18:57:10] <fizk_> you can, but it's still totally non-standard
  126. [18:57:33] <yangman> and it's not meant to be
  127. [18:57:41] <yangman> standarized, that is
  128. [18:58:24] <fizk_> why wouldn't OpenID say, "if the user owns a username, include the dam username!!"
  129. [18:58:42] <fizk_> that way, if there isn't a username, that's ok
  130. [18:58:45] <yangman> beyond the scope
  131. [18:59:35] <fizk_> i guess an "extension" could make this a requirement?
  132. [18:59:43] <yangman> the whole point is to do away with site-specific identifiers
  133. [19:02:34] <fizk_> yet, the first thing you do with a new OpenID user is give them a site specific identifier
  134. [19:02:47] <yangman> provider specific
  135. [19:02:49] <fizk_> i laughed when i found that
  136. [19:03:05] <fizk_> what's the difference
  137. [19:03:18] <yangman> ?
  138. [19:03:25] <fizk_> provider vs site specific
  139. [19:04:03] <yangman> no difference. provider is just a more well-defined term in the context of OpenID
  140. [19:04:38] <yangman> it's just the provider saying "before I authenticate you via OpenID to this third-party, authenticate with us first"
  141. [19:05:01] <yangman> that's not intrinsic to OpenID. I run my own OpenID server where the only requirement is I type in my passphrase
  142. [19:05:11] <fizk_> i'm not even sure what the benefit of the dual accounts is, anyway
  143. [19:05:37] <yangman> what dual account?
  144. [19:05:49] * daleolds1 (n=daleolds@137.65.228.97) has joined #openid
  145. [19:05:53] <fizk_> eg. i sign up to sf.net, give them my openid, signup for a username, then i come back and login with my username.....
  146. [19:06:33] <yangman> now you're talking about consumers. just a limitation in the account management implementation, probably
  147. [19:06:43] <yangman> since it needs to support both
  148. [19:07:07] <fizk_> do you see any benefit for sf.net to use openid?
  149. [19:07:13] <fizk_> i dont
  150. [19:07:18] <yangman> sure. I can log in using my openid
  151. [19:07:51] <yangman> and change my password to something ridiculous that won't be vulnerable to typical password attacks
  152. [19:07:59] * jochen (n=jochen@11.177-243-81.adsl-dyn.isp.belgacom.be) has joined #openid
  153. [19:08:10] * mosites_ (n=mosites@193.sub-75-213-204.myvzw.com) has joined #openid
  154. [19:08:16] <fizk_> let me try, it always asks me for my username afterwards
  155. [19:09:12] <fizk_> right now, i logged in with yahoo, was returned to associate with sf.net account, clicked login, and I'm staring at a blank page :)
  156. [19:09:33] * mosites (n=mosites@154.sub-75-215-185.myvzw.com) Quit (Read error: 110 (Connection timed out))
  157. [19:09:34] * mosites_ is now known as mosites
  158. [19:11:55] <yangman> probably something done wrong in yahoo's end
  159. [19:12:02] <yangman> I've never had issues with sf.net's openid
  160. [19:15:23] <fizk_> ok, my blogger account worked
  161. [19:15:35] <fizk_> but i'm not identified as my blogger account on sf.net
  162. [19:15:48] <fizk_> so instead of typing in one password, i typed in another
  163. [19:15:51] <fizk_> ..............
  164. [19:15:53] <fizk_> :)
  165. [19:16:40] <fizk_> there's a lack of persistent online identity ..............
  166. [19:16:47] <fizk_> i think that's what i'm looking for
  167. [19:17:17] <yangman> well, you're using multiple logins
  168. [19:17:45] <fizk_> sf.net requires 2 logins
  169. [19:17:51] <fizk_> and many many others
  170. [19:18:29] <fizk_> and i don't think they usually identify you on their site with your openid
  171. [19:18:54] <yangman> I don't know what you're doing but that's clearly not the case
  172. [19:18:56] <fizk_> if we had an online identity mentality going into this
  173. [19:19:05] * daleolds (n=daleolds@137.65.156.33) Quit (Read error: 110 (Connection timed out))
  174. [19:19:16] <fizk_> it'd be better
  175. [19:19:33] <yangman> you do need to link your sf.net account to the openid identity, though, and it still uses the local account for everything
  176. [19:19:47] <fizk_> yea
  177. [19:19:49] <yangman> but logging in with openid is painless
  178. [19:19:57] <fizk_> painless, but pointless
  179. [19:20:08] <fizk_> there's no real reward
  180. [19:20:18] <yangman> for you, maybe
  181. [19:20:42] <fizk_> what's the assumed reward?
  182. [19:20:47] <fizk_> one login?
  183. [19:20:54] <fizk_> that's not the case
  184. [19:20:57] <fizk_> one password?
  185. [19:21:04] <fizk_> that's not happening
  186. [19:21:13] <yangman> both inaccurate assertions
  187. [19:21:24] <fizk_> global recognition using one identity ? that's not happening
  188. [19:21:53] <yangman> you don't seem to want to actually be convinced otherwise of anything. I don't really see the point in continuing this
  189. [19:22:48] <fizk_> i've been fighting on and off with openid....trust me, i want to be convinced that I don't need to start a whole new initiaitive for something so trivial yet powerful
  190. [19:23:05] <fizk_> it's in my benefit to be convinced
  191. [19:23:50] <fizk_> but so far, i'm convinced that openid isn't quite as wonderful as it could be ( or should be, in my opinion )
  192. [19:25:06] * mosites (n=mosites@193.sub-75-213-204.myvzw.com) Quit ("Streamy (http://www.streamy.com/)")
  193. [19:25:50] <yangman> how so?
  194. [19:26:35] <fizk_> here's what i believe a user should know when a site says they use OpenID:
  195. [19:26:58] <yangman> use as in consume, or use as in provide?
  196. [19:27:08] <fizk_> 1. They can prove to this new domain that they are john.doe@youtube.com [ we dont need to discuss this again, tho ]
  197. [19:27:16] <fizk_> provide
  198. [19:28:16] <fizk_> 2. The site will recognize them via their OpenID so that the user can increase recognition of their online identity
  199. [19:28:38] <fizk_> 3. They need one, and only one, password
  200. [19:29:46] <fizk_> the end
  201. [19:29:55] <yangman> ok
  202. [19:30:31] <yangman> so, 1 is out of scope, and with good reasons. maybe webfinger will remedy this
  203. [19:30:58] <yangman> 2 is an implementation thing. *shrug*
  204. [19:31:17] <yangman> 3 is already the case, assuming conformant consumer and provider
  205. [19:32:32] <fizk_> the act of mapping your openID to another account breaks #3
  206. [19:32:43] <yangman> how?
  207. [19:32:55] <fizk_> you shouldn't need to create another account
  208. [19:33:06] <yangman> having two passwords does not imply having to *use* multiple passwords
  209. [19:33:28] <yangman> and there are sites that will happily accept just an openid identity
  210. [19:33:42] <fizk_> true, but i still needed to signup for a new account, which shouldn't be needed in my opinion
  211. [19:34:03] <fizk_> ok, but OpenID should come with this _guarantee_
  212. [19:34:05] <yangman> that's a UI flaw in the consumer, not a fault of OpenID
  213. [19:34:13] <yangman> why?
  214. [19:34:29] <yangman> it's not something you can sensibly guarantee
  215. [19:34:39] <fizk_> again, if we're coming into this with a mindset of managing online identities, only needing one or two identities for EVERY OpenID site in existence
  216. [19:35:20] <flaccid> fizk_: yeah i think you are have the wrong idea with openid. the concept is one identifier which is the openid url. new sites don't need to create local usernames at all..
  217. [19:35:22] <yangman> ah, but that's not what openid provides
  218. [19:36:08] <fizk_> technically, you can't guarantee anything, but if they are said to comply with the spirit and technical details of OpenID, then I should be able to expect that OpenID users are frustrated with SF.net
  219. [19:36:20] <fizk_> and want to see a change in this aspect
  220. [19:36:36] <yangman> but it's not a protocol issue. it's an adoption issue
  221. [19:37:26] <flaccid> keep in mind that we rely on the relying parties and providers to properly implement openid + use a logical business logic flow. its very common to see bad implementations of openid, particularly in big sites. once again, if people don't implement correctly well they are not supporting openid properly
  222. [19:37:36] * flaccid agrees with yangman
  223. [19:39:21] <yangman> to draw an analogy, it's like blaming the municipal building codes because people keep building doors to houses in different spots
  224. [19:40:30] <fizk_> yea, i can see it being an adoption issue, but also a marketing issue
  225. [19:40:45] <fizk_> OpenID is not marketing itself as what I thought it should be
  226. [19:41:13] <fizk_> one global online identity for all OpenID compliant sites
  227. [19:41:24] <yangman> it markets no such thing
  228. [19:41:35] <fizk_> regognized as that identity through and through
  229. [19:41:41] <yangman> that's just an ideology to strive towards
  230. [19:42:21] <fizk_> it is, and i thought openid was claiming to have solved that problem
  231. [19:42:32] <fizk_> but it seems to be out of scope, as u say
  232. [19:42:36] <yangman> no, it doesn't
  233. [19:42:49] <fizk_> so there should be a new inititive where that is the exactly the scope
  234. [19:43:00] <yangman> openid only guarentees control over the claimed ID
  235. [19:43:15] <yangman> this isn't something vaguely defined. this is mathematically provable
  236. [19:43:23] <yangman> it doesn't guarantee anything else because it can't
  237. [19:45:45] <yangman> having global identities and proving authentication against them is hard
  238. [19:46:10] <yangman> the fact that we still don't have them shows how hard it is
  239. [19:46:23] <fizk_> it's far too simple
  240. [19:46:31] <fizk_> what's hard about it?
  241. [19:46:41] <fizk_> we have databases, we know how to code against a protocol...
  242. [19:47:00] <yangman> name one piece of globally unique identifier we can give people
  243. [19:47:22] <fizk_> an email address?
  244. [19:47:28] <fizk_> a phone number
  245. [19:47:31] <fizk_> a home address
  246. [19:47:37] <yangman> those are all transient
  247. [19:47:49] <fizk_> what's transient :)
  248. [19:47:57] <yangman> it can change over time
  249. [19:48:00] <yangman> but, lets ignore that
  250. [19:48:32] <fizk_> yea, that's another problem i read about
  251. [19:48:45] * daedeloth (n=daedelot@ip-81-11-160-7.dsl.scarlet.be) Quit (Remote closed the connection)
  252. [19:49:08] <fizk_> but a global identifier that may change would be ok by me, for this inititive
  253. [19:49:33] <yangman> so, how do you go from an email to "therefore it is proved that I cliam to be who I am, and you believe that I cliam to be who I am"?
  254. [19:50:08] <fizk_> hm
  255. [19:50:20] <fizk_> if we were to use email
  256. [19:50:51] <fizk_> the site would ask the user for their email address, send them a link, and wait for them to click on it
  257. [19:51:24] <flaccid> fizk_: one global online identity for all OpenID compliant sites <--- this actually true. Adoption is always the issue thats all. I don't actually see any problems fizk_ in terms of what you are saying or that there be some initiative for something which I don't see any gap here..
  258. [19:51:26] <fizk_> and they'd be recognized on the site as john.doe@gmail.com
  259. [19:52:01] <yangman> fizk_: ok. now, how's that any different to what openid provides?
  260. [19:52:09] * Kaliya (n=Adium@12.238.61.2) has joined #openid
  261. [19:52:43] <yangman> fwiw, with this email case, what's established is the weak assersion "I can read email sent to the address <foo>"
  262. [19:52:57] <flaccid> fizk_: there is EAUT. this will work with openid to prove in two factors possibly that someone owns an email address/identity URL. EAUT uses XRDS for this
  263. [19:53:03] <fizk_> flaccid: let's take sf.net for example. Yahoo returns a long, ugly URL to sf.net
  264. [19:53:30] <fizk_> flaccid: I don't want that to be how people recognize me on sf.net
  265. [19:53:42] * jochen (n=jochen@11.177-243-81.adsl-dyn.isp.belgacom.be) Quit (Remote closed the connection)
  266. [19:53:45] <flaccid> fizk_: and once again that is implementation. they HAD the choice to properly implement and use static, logical identifiers...
  267. [19:54:07] <fizk_> flaccid: never mind that sf.net doesn't even use my openid as my username when I post content/send messages/etc
  268. [19:54:31] <flaccid> sorry fizk_ me and yangman have re-iterated that this is site specific. If I was sf.net i would of done it properly, the same goes if I owned Yahoo! etc.
  269. [19:55:02] <flaccid> your problem is not with openid but rather sites that implement it. i hope after use repeating this many times that this time you get that..
  270. [19:55:07] <yangman> one key point that hasn't been brought up is the freedom to do it differently
  271. [19:55:40] <yangman> there's the option to provide simpler information, but there's also the option to hide it
  272. [19:55:43] <yangman> this is by design
  273. [19:55:59] <fizk_> the inititive that I'm looking for would not allow the implementers to "do it differently"
  274. [19:56:15] <yangman> you're complaning that Yahoo! has chosen the option to hide it, while sf.net has chosen not to use it even if it did have it
  275. [19:56:50] <fizk_> the inititive would not only be a protocol....it would be an effort of global recognition of my identity
  276. [19:56:51] <yangman> then what you're looking for isn't openID
  277. [19:57:22] <fizk_> no, seems like it's not
  278. [19:57:27] <fizk_> <sigh>
  279. [19:57:56] <yangman> you can chose freedom and distribution, or strictness and centralization
  280. [19:58:09] <yangman> it's not like the latter haven't been attempted before
  281. [19:58:14] <yangman> over and over
  282. [20:01:13] <flaccid> um, i still see no problem. You can share information on your profile page. You can publish and exchange data via AX and SReg. You can use OpenSocial protocols too and things like XFN for social relations. You can use OAuth for authorisation of resources/data. There really is no limitation here.
  283. [20:01:33] <flaccid> so there already is the tools for global recognition of my identity
  284. [20:01:50] <flaccid> so i don't see any lack of freedom or protocols here
  285. [20:07:14] <fizk_> the raw tools definitely exist, but it requires more than tools. Implementers would need to get behind the idea of global identity, not just single-sign-on and then do whatever you want
  286. [20:08:49] <fizk_> to help this move forward, we'd put a face to it...call it something, create whatever protocol is needed, and possibly award official recognition to those who do proper implementations
  287. [20:09:35] <fizk_> something like, "Duuuuuuuuuude, you DA MAN!!!"
  288. [20:10:05] <fizk_> and the right to use our logo
  289. [20:10:52] * hillsy (n=shhi2@npfit3.dh.bytemark.co.uk) Quit ("Leaving")
  290. [20:10:53] <fizk_> all the town would rejoice! :)
  291. [20:13:15] <flaccid> there is no need to create any more protocols. what you are talking about is what yangman mentioned fromt he start. adoption + the fact that the big players do not act as relying parties. they still want to be centralised and not share the net. this is a business decision. what needs to happen is a change in attitude to be open and support de-centralised models such as openid and opensocial. until that day happens, it will be just like how it is no
  292. [20:13:34] <fizk_> but thanks for helping with this guys, that was the conversation i've been waiting for a long time
  293. [20:13:47] <flaccid> in terms of putting a face to it. well OpenID already does. you can't force people to adopt something you know..
  294. [20:16:35] <fizk_> you can't force people to adopt something you know ?
  295. [20:21:58] <fizk_> i guess u're right about the business decision
  296. [20:26:14] <fizk_> alrighty, bbl
  297. [20:36:25] * daleolds1 (n=daleolds@137.65.228.97) has left #openid
  298. [20:46:08] * tbbrown_ (n=tom@doc-209-33-85-251.kingwood.tx.cebridge.net) has joined #openid
  299. [20:47:29] <flaccid> yeah thats what im saying
  300. [20:47:32] * Kaliya (n=Adium@12.238.61.2) Quit ("Leaving.")
  301. [20:48:58] * qwp0 (n=qwp0@gw.localnet.sk) Quit (Remote closed the connection)
  302. [20:57:52] * Kaliya (n=Adium@12.238.61.2) has joined #openid
  303. [20:58:11] * MacTed (n=Thud@63.119.36.36) Quit ()
  304. [20:59:20] * tbbrown (n=tom@doc-209-33-85-251.kingwood.tx.cebridge.net) Quit (Read error: 110 (Connection timed out))
  305. [21:05:21] * daleolds (n=daleolds@137.65.156.30) has joined #openid
  306. [21:12:33] * Simon- (i=simon@proxima.lp0.eu) Quit ("Reconnecting")
  307. [21:12:45] * Simon- (i=simon@proxima.lp0.eu) has joined #openid
  308. [21:22:44] * Acro_ (i=acro@nixy.dk) has joined #openid
  309. [21:23:07] * Acro (i=acro@unaffiliated/acro) Quit (Read error: 131 (Connection reset by peer))
  310. [21:41:50] * Kaliya (n=Adium@12.238.61.2) Quit ("Leaving.")
  311. [21:41:56] * josephholsten (n=josephho@ip70-189-108-199.ok.ok.cox.net) Quit ()
  312. [22:15:11] * thesmith_ (n=bens@78-86-7-25.zone2.bethere.co.uk) has joined #openid
  313. [22:31:39] * thesmith (n=bens@78-86-7-25.zone2.bethere.co.uk) Quit (Read error: 110 (Connection timed out))
  314. [23:45:09] * dwhittle (n=dwhittle@nat/yahoo/x-gcgnnybmfawvtldw) has joined #openid
  315. [23:58:05] * shigeta (n=shigeta@sakkgw2.sixapart.jp) has joined #openid
  316. [23:58:59] * dwhittle (n=dwhittle@nat/yahoo/x-gcgnnybmfawvtldw) Quit ("Im gone.")

These logs were automatically created by OpenIDlogbot on chat.freenode.net using a modified version of the Java IRC LogBot.