+1 For John :-)
 

Op 14 dec 2009, om 20:32 heeft John Panzer het volgende geschreven:

> On Mon, Dec 14, 2009 at 11:21 AM, Peter Watkins <[email protected]> wrote:
> On Mon, Dec 14, 2009 at 09:48:54AM +0100, Chris Obdam wrote:
> 
> > I think there a no real privacy issues with this idea? Ok, you know from 
> > this anonymous user that he or she has an OpenID with XXX, but is that a 
> > bad thing?
> 
> Yes, it is a bad thing.
> 
> 1) Privacy. I want to be in control of what information RPs have about
> me. I see how you think it wouldn't be a big deal for someone to see that
> I'm logged in to Google and Flickr -- what does that really say about me,
> you think? Nothing, right? But imagine a group of ideologically simliar
> groups deciding to implement RP+OP to make it easier for like-minded
> individuals to use all their sites without relying on some mega-OP? I
> don't want the data-hungry folks at Facebook noticing that I'm logged
> in to the Greenpeace or National Rifle Association unless I explicitly
> approve letting Facebook know that.
> 
> The OP should be able to opt-in to whatever mechanism is set up.  (Note that 
> even today, you may be able to use visited-link color hacks to determine what 
> OPs a user has recently frequented; statistically speaking you can already 
> get the information you're worried about.)  
>  
> 
> 2) Security. A malicious site could more intelligently target victims
> if it could ascertain what sites the victim is logged into. There's no
> need to attempt some online Gmail exploit if the malicious RP can tell
> that the victim isn't logged in to Google.
> 
> Again, per above, I think this information is probably already available to 
> evil.org, at least statistically speaking.
>  
> 
> I would hope that
> 
> A) OPs would give each user control over whether this discovery was enabled
> for his account (and possibly to whom it was available).
> 
> B) Any spec describing this would note that the OP SHOULD give each user
> the ability to disable this feature for their account and that the default
> for new users SHOULD be to not provide this information.
> 
> BTW, this sounds a lot like what Luke Shepard of Facebook described wanting
> to add to checkid_immediate:
>  http://www.sociallipstick.com/2009/04/?y%/lets-detect-logged-in-state/
>  http://lists.openid.net/pipermail/openid-general/2009-May/018232.html
> 
> -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

Reply via email to