I don't mean to troll. I just don't understand why RPs don't just
trust the OP's word. Even if this is just a flag to show that Yahoo/
JanRain/Google did the verification, aren't they going to have to
ignore it when I send it from my OP of ill repute? If they're second
guessing the OP based on verified-timestamp and i'm-the-postmaster-i-
mean-it, that's at least something, though it'll still need a
whitelist of OP that probably don't cheat.
Am I nuts? Are RPs really saying they don't trust an email assertion
from a whitelisted OP without a verified flag? Or that they aren't
going to whitelist at all?
I won't waste anyone's time thinking about SHOULDs, MUSTs or trust
considerations then.
--
j
On Dec 8, 2009, at 10:16 AM, Brian Kissel wrote:
+1. As Allen has said before, and many RPs have confirmed, a
verified email address with the attributes he's recommending allow
RPs to remove a very problematic step in their workflow where the
user has to get an email from the RP then click on it to "verify"
the address before enabling an account. There are non-trivial
registration losses in this workflow when those verification emails
go to spam folders or users just forget to click the link.
Delivering a verified email let's RPs register a user in real time
eliminating this step in the workflow. This gets higher
registrations and instantaneous access and gratification to the user.
Cheers,
Brian
___________
Brian Kissel
CEO, JanRain - WebID and Social Publishing for User Engagement
Email: [email protected] Cell: 503.866.4424 Fax:
503.296.5502
-----Original Message-----
From: [email protected] [mailto:[email protected]
] On Behalf Of Joseph A Holsten
Sent: Tuesday, December 08, 2009 1:57 AM
To: Allen Tom
Cc: [email protected]
Subject: Re: Yahoo available AX attrs
I understand the desire to say that the email is verified, but it
strikes me as a bit like the urgent priority field in email. "No email
provided" vs "This is the user's email" vs "This is Really the User's
Email and I Mean It". Unless it means "This is the user's email, I've
done due diligence, and you can hold me legally liable." Everything
else boils down to understanding what the OP means when they make an
assertion.
If you really want a verified flag/timestamp/zero-knowledge-proof,
perhaps you have a better idea about the interaction flow when things
aren't verified to 100% certainty. Would the OP require the user to
verify their email before allowing them to authenticate? Leave it up
to the RP to verify? What if the OP says they're certain but the RP
doesn't actually trust them? What happens when the OP says they've
verified, but not 100% certain? Do you expect different RPs to make
different decisions in these circumstances? How would they choose?
I'm assuming we're not talking about RPs that have a significant
legal / medical / financial interest in accurate assertions, because
that's legal liability / consent / know your customer and you'll need
more than a timestamp+i-mean-it for that.
--
j
On Dec 7, 2009, at 10:36 PM, Allen Tom wrote:
I'd recommend using a timestamp indicating when it was last
verified, with a special value to indicate that the OP is also the
email provider and has 100% certainty. (perhaps just setting the
verification time==now is sufficient)
Allen
On 12/7/09 8:29 PM, "Chris Messina" <[email protected]> wrote:
Sounds like something to add to PoCo... perhaps something as simple
as a "verified" boolean added to email addresses?
http://portablecontacts.net/draft-schema.html#anchor4
Chris
On Mon, Dec 7, 2009 at 8:25 PM, Brian Kissel <[email protected]>
wrote:
+1 on email address metadata, many RPs definitely want this.
Cheers,
Brian
___________
Brian Kissel
CEO, JanRain - WebID and Social Publishing for User Engagement
Email: [email protected] Cell: 503.866.4424 Fax:
503.296.5502
-----Original Message-----
From: [email protected]
[mailto:[email protected]
] On Behalf Of Allen Tom
Sent: Monday, December 07, 2009 7:46 PM
To: Peter Watkins; Chris Obdam; [email protected]
Subject: Re: Yahoo available AX attrs
Oops - I clicked send too early.
The bad UX with AX is the security warning that most browsers
display when
POSTing a form from HTTPS to HTTP, which is the case when the
Yahoo OP
returns a lot of attributes. AX attribute names are excessively
long, so
it's very likely that using different attribute names for first/
last/middle
name will cause the response to be returned via POST. (2KB is the
cutoff
point)
With regards to email address - unless we're 100% sure about the
email
address, we'd like to return metadata about the email address.
Specifically,
we'd like to indicate whether or not the email address was
verified, and if
so, when it was verified. This is definitely something that we'd
like to get
in to AX 2.0.
Allen
On 12/7/09 7:39 PM, "Allen Tom" <[email protected]> wrote:
It definitely makes sense to use different attributes for
givennanme/surname
so that RPs don't have to parse the string, and a few other RPs
have also
asked for it. Our initial goal for our AX implementation was
just to match
SREG, and SREG only has a single openid.sreg.fullname attribute.
We'll add support for separate first/last/middle/suffix
attributes in a
followup release - probably early next year. I do hope that
we're able to
standardize the attribute names, and also keep them short and
compact. If you
ask for all our supported attributes, the response will exceed
2KB, which
requires that the response is returned via POST, causing a
really bad UX.
With regards to email address - we'd like to be able to return
metadata about
the email address w
On 12/7/09 7:25 AM, "Peter Watkins" <[email protected]> wrote:
On Mon, Dec 07, 2009 at 09:16:46AM +0100, Chris Obdam wrote:
Chris (Obdam) - which additional attributes would you like
to see
available? The attributes that we'll be adding early next
year will include
Yahoo Profile URL and account creation date. A bunch of
people have asked
for Flickr Photos URL and Upcoming Profile URL, so we'll
probably get
around
to adding those too.
I would like to access every attr specified in de AXschema? :-)
In my Yahoo profile i have provided my address (home and
work). I would like
to use those in a sign form somewhere else.
Same goes for my phone numbers.
So would I. One of the simpler goals of our Single Sign On is
prepopulating
form fields; having postal address and phone number would be a
help.
I'd also like to see First and Last names available as separate
attributes,
otherwise we're trying to intelligently split both "Mary Jane
Parker" and
"Malcom Mac Murray".
Also I would prefer that you give us the user's *primary* email
address. In
my Yahoo profile, my Yahoo email address is flagged as "Share
with no one"
and I have a different email address flagged as primary, but
your AX sends
my yahoo email address. That's bad from usability in part
because I very,
very seldom check my Yahoo email inbox.
The Yahoo website attribute would also be nice to have; as we
start
building more "social" features on our sites, it would be nice
to make
it easier for our users to share links to their primary web
presences,
although I can understand if Yahoo management prefers to only
expose the
Profile URL for business reasons.
Thanks,
Peter
_______________________________________________
specs mailing list
[email protected]
http://lists.openid.net/mailman/listinfo/openid-specs
_______________________________________________
specs mailing list
[email protected]
http://lists.openid.net/mailman/listinfo/openid-specs
_______________________________________________
specs mailing list
[email protected]
http://lists.openid.net/mailman/listinfo/openid-specs
_______________________________________________
specs mailing list
[email protected]
http://lists.openid.net/mailman/listinfo/openid-specs
_______________________________________________
specs mailing list
[email protected]
http://lists.openid.net/mailman/listinfo/openid-specs
