Re: [OpenID] Announcing OpenID Authentication 2.0 - Implementor's Draft 11

2007-01-22 Thread Josh Hoyt
On 1/22/07, Ben Laurie [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
  On 1/22/07, Ben Laurie [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
   OK, the idea is pretty simple. Rather like the OpenID Authentication
   Security Profiles you have a profile where the RP states what kind of
   End User/OP authentication is acceptable to it. Sites with low/zero
   value attached to the login can accept any kind of EU/OP auth, whereas
   high value sites can require unphishable auth.
 
  I like the sound of this proposal, but I don't see how the RP could
  know whether the OP is actually using unphishable authentication
  when that kind of authentication is requested. Is it necessary for the
  RP to be able to tell for sure, and if so, how could it tell?

 No, I don't think it is necessary. If users want to trust their
 identity to OPs that lie, that's their decision.

In that case, I think this could just be part of the Assertion
Quality Extension. [1] I haven't been involved in that specification
at all, but my understanding is that it provides a way of expressing
what kind of authentication the RP would like to have when a request
is made to the OP.

Josh

1. http://openid.net/specs/openid-assertion-quality-extension-1_0-01.html
___
specs mailing list
specs@openid.net
http://openid.net/mailman/listinfo/specs


Re: [OpenID] Announcing OpenID Authentication 2.0 - Implementor's Draft 11

2007-01-22 Thread Ben Laurie
On 1/22/07, Ben Laurie [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
 On 1/22/07, Josh Hoyt [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
  On 1/22/07, Ben Laurie [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
On 1/22/07, Ben Laurie [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
 OK, the idea is pretty simple. Rather like the OpenID Authentication
 Security Profiles you have a profile where the RP states what kind of
 End User/OP authentication is acceptable to it. Sites with low/zero
 value attached to the login can accept any kind of EU/OP auth, whereas
 high value sites can require unphishable auth.
   
I like the sound of this proposal, but I don't see how the RP could
know whether the OP is actually using unphishable authentication
when that kind of authentication is requested. Is it necessary for the
RP to be able to tell for sure, and if so, how could it tell?
  
   No, I don't think it is necessary. If users want to trust their
   identity to OPs that lie, that's their decision.
 
  In that case, I think this could just be part of the Assertion
  Quality Extension. [1] I haven't been involved in that specification
  at all, but my understanding is that it provides a way of expressing
  what kind of authentication the RP would like to have when a request
  is made to the OP.

 Actually, it appears to allow the RP to tell the OP what kind of
 authentication was used, which is backwards.

Sorry, I mean the OP to tell the RP!


 It also seems to be rather lacking in meat. Still, a step in the right
 direction.

 
  Josh
 
  1. http://openid.net/specs/openid-assertion-quality-extension-1_0-01.html
 

___
specs mailing list
specs@openid.net
http://openid.net/mailman/listinfo/specs


Re: [security] [OpenID] Announcing OpenID Authentication 2.0 - Implementor's Draft 11

2007-01-22 Thread Marcin JagodziƄski
2007/1/22, Ben Laurie [EMAIL PROTECTED]:
 Actually, it appears to allow the RP to tell the OP what kind of
 authentication was used, which is backwards.

 It also seems to be rather lacking in meat. Still, a step in the right
 direction.


I asked this question some time ago: is there any possibility for RP
to ask OP to use some authentication method? Or another scenario: how
can user select one of OP's for this particular authentication from
his Yadis file.

regards,

Marcin
___
specs mailing list
specs@openid.net
http://openid.net/mailman/listinfo/specs


OpenID and phishing (was Announcing OpenID Authentication 2.0 - Implementor's Draft 11)

2007-01-22 Thread Simon Willison

On 19 Jan 2007, at 14:19, Ben Laurie wrote:

 Still totally unhappy about the phishing issues, which I blogged  
 about here:

 http://www.links.org/?p=187

I have a proposal which I think could greatly reduce the risk of  
phishing: identity providers should /never/ display their login form  
(or a link to the form) on a page that has been redirected to by an  
OpenID consumer.

Instead, they should instruct the user to navigate to the login page  
themselves. The login page should have a short, memorable URL and  
users should be encouraged to bookmark it themselves when they sign  
up for the provider. The OpenID landing page then becomes an  
opportunity to help protect users against phishing rather than just  
being a vector for the attack.

I've fleshed this out on my blog:

http://simonwillison.net/2007/Jan/19/phishing/

Does that sound workable?

Cheers,

Simon
___
specs mailing list
specs@openid.net
http://openid.net/mailman/listinfo/specs


Re: [OpenID] Announcing OpenID Authentication 2.0 - Implementor's Draft 11

2007-01-21 Thread Ben Laurie
On 1/19/07, Dick Hardt [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:

 On 19-Jan-07, at 6:19 AM, Ben Laurie wrote:

 
  Still totally unhappy about the phishing issues, which I blogged
  about here:
 
  http://www.links.org/?p=187

 There are numerous ways of solving this. Several standard methods can
 solve it. It is a relationship between the user and the OP and the RP
 is not party, so I don't think it belongs in the OpenID
 Authentication specification.

 That does not mean it is not important, just that *this* spec is not
 the right place.

I think that's entirely wrong. The RP doesn't care at all about the OP
- all the RP cares about is the end user.

More importantly, I think I have a solution that will make both of us
happy, but I now have to go and ride my motorbike fast, so I'll detail
it later.
___
specs mailing list
specs@openid.net
http://openid.net/mailman/listinfo/specs


RE: Announcing OpenID Authentication 2.0 - Implementor's Draft 11

2007-01-19 Thread Recordon, David
I'm not sure what the right process is, though my hunch is that we'll
know the time is right once there are multiple working OpenID Auth 2.0
RPs and OPs on the web from different vendors that people are at least
testing with.  Until code that implements the spec exists in the wild, I
doubt we can really ultimately call it final.

That's just my take on it though...

--David 

-Original Message-
From: Dick Hardt [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] 
Sent: Thursday, January 18, 2007 11:38 PM
To: heraldry-dev@incubator.apache.org
Cc: openid-general; specs@openid.net
Subject: Re: Announcing OpenID Authentication 2.0 - Implementor's Draft
11

David

A couple questions:

1) Would you like to set a deadline for final comments? Perhaps a week?

2) What is the approval process now? Is it still as posted at:

http://openid.net/specs.bml

Currently, the collective authors of OpenID Authentication (David
Recordon, Josh Hoyt, Dick Hardt, and Brad Fitzpatrick) oversee this
process and make the final determination of when a proposal has
matured.

-- Dick

On 18-Jan-07, at 7:35 PM, Recordon, David wrote:

 So with great pleasure I get to announce the culmination of about nine

 months of work between the OpenID, XRI, Sxip, and LID communities in 
 the drafting of OpenID Authentication 2.0.  This evening the editors 
 have published the final draft of the spec, which we now feel is in a 
 solid state for public implementations.

 There are already implementations in various languages 
 (http://svn.apache.org/repos/asf/incubator/heraldry/libraries/,
 http://code.google.com/p/openid4java/,
 http://code.google.com/p/openid4perl/) supporting this spec and more 
 will emerge over the next few weeks.

 There will be another draft of the spec before it is considered final,

 though unless unforeseen implementation problems emerge these changes 
 will be further wordsmithing and cleanup.

 http://openid.net/specs/openid-authentication-2_0-11.html (dated
 today)

 Cool? Cool!

 --David



___
specs mailing list
specs@openid.net
http://openid.net/mailman/listinfo/specs


Re: [OpenID] Announcing OpenID Authentication 2.0 - Implementor's Draft 11

2007-01-19 Thread Ben Laurie
On 1/19/07, Recordon, David [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
 So with great pleasure I get to announce the culmination of about nine
 months of work between the OpenID, XRI, Sxip, and LID communities in the
 drafting of OpenID Authentication 2.0.  This evening the editors have
 published the final draft of the spec, which we now feel is in a solid
 state for public implementations.

 There are already implementations in various languages
 (http://svn.apache.org/repos/asf/incubator/heraldry/libraries/,
 http://code.google.com/p/openid4java/,
 http://code.google.com/p/openid4perl/) supporting this spec and more
 will emerge over the next few weeks.

 There will be another draft of the spec before it is considered final,
 though unless unforeseen implementation problems emerge these changes
 will be further wordsmithing and cleanup.

 http://openid.net/specs/openid-authentication-2_0-11.html (dated today)

 Cool? Cool!

Still totally unhappy about the phishing issues, which I blogged about here:

http://www.links.org/?p=187


 --David
 ___
 general mailing list
 [EMAIL PROTECTED]
 http://openid.net/mailman/listinfo/general

___
specs mailing list
specs@openid.net
http://openid.net/mailman/listinfo/specs


Re: [OpenID] Announcing OpenID Authentication 2.0 - Implementor's Draft 11

2007-01-19 Thread Dick Hardt

On 19-Jan-07, at 6:19 AM, Ben Laurie wrote:


 Still totally unhappy about the phishing issues, which I blogged  
 about here:

 http://www.links.org/?p=187

There are numerous ways of solving this. Several standard methods can  
solve it. It is a relationship between the user and the OP and the RP  
is not party, so I don't think it belongs in the OpenID  
Authentication specification.

That does not mean it is not important, just that *this* spec is not  
the right place.

-- Dick
___
specs mailing list
specs@openid.net
http://openid.net/mailman/listinfo/specs


Announcing OpenID Authentication 2.0 - Implementor's Draft 11

2007-01-18 Thread Recordon, David
So with great pleasure I get to announce the culmination of about nine
months of work between the OpenID, XRI, Sxip, and LID communities in the
drafting of OpenID Authentication 2.0.  This evening the editors have
published the final draft of the spec, which we now feel is in a solid
state for public implementations.

There are already implementations in various languages
(http://svn.apache.org/repos/asf/incubator/heraldry/libraries/,
http://code.google.com/p/openid4java/,
http://code.google.com/p/openid4perl/) supporting this spec and more
will emerge over the next few weeks.

There will be another draft of the spec before it is considered final,
though unless unforeseen implementation problems emerge these changes
will be further wordsmithing and cleanup.

http://openid.net/specs/openid-authentication-2_0-11.html (dated today)

Cool? Cool!

--David
___
specs mailing list
specs@openid.net
http://openid.net/mailman/listinfo/specs


Re: Announcing OpenID Authentication 2.0 - Implementor's Draft 11

2007-01-18 Thread Dick Hardt
Great job David, Johnny and Josh!

-- Dick

On 18-Jan-07, at 7:35 PM, Recordon, David wrote:

 So with great pleasure I get to announce the culmination of about nine
 months of work between the OpenID, XRI, Sxip, and LID communities  
 in the
 drafting of OpenID Authentication 2.0.  This evening the editors have
 published the final draft of the spec, which we now feel is in a solid
 state for public implementations.

 There are already implementations in various languages
 (http://svn.apache.org/repos/asf/incubator/heraldry/libraries/,
 http://code.google.com/p/openid4java/,
 http://code.google.com/p/openid4perl/) supporting this spec and more
 will emerge over the next few weeks.

 There will be another draft of the spec before it is considered final,
 though unless unforeseen implementation problems emerge these changes
 will be further wordsmithing and cleanup.

 http://openid.net/specs/openid-authentication-2_0-11.html (dated  
 today)

 Cool? Cool!

 --David



___
specs mailing list
specs@openid.net
http://openid.net/mailman/listinfo/specs


Re: Announcing OpenID Authentication 2.0 - Implementor's Draft 11

2007-01-18 Thread Dick Hardt
David

A couple questions:

1) Would you like to set a deadline for final comments? Perhaps a week?

2) What is the approval process now? Is it still as posted at:

http://openid.net/specs.bml

Currently, the collective authors of OpenID Authentication (David  
Recordon, Josh Hoyt, Dick Hardt, and Brad Fitzpatrick) oversee this  
process and make the final determination of when a proposal has  
matured.

-- Dick

On 18-Jan-07, at 7:35 PM, Recordon, David wrote:

 So with great pleasure I get to announce the culmination of about nine
 months of work between the OpenID, XRI, Sxip, and LID communities  
 in the
 drafting of OpenID Authentication 2.0.  This evening the editors have
 published the final draft of the spec, which we now feel is in a solid
 state for public implementations.

 There are already implementations in various languages
 (http://svn.apache.org/repos/asf/incubator/heraldry/libraries/,
 http://code.google.com/p/openid4java/,
 http://code.google.com/p/openid4perl/) supporting this spec and more
 will emerge over the next few weeks.

 There will be another draft of the spec before it is considered final,
 though unless unforeseen implementation problems emerge these changes
 will be further wordsmithing and cleanup.

 http://openid.net/specs/openid-authentication-2_0-11.html (dated  
 today)

 Cool? Cool!

 --David



___
specs mailing list
specs@openid.net
http://openid.net/mailman/listinfo/specs


Re: Announcing OpenID Authentication 2.0 - Implementor's Draft 11

2007-01-18 Thread Dick Hardt
Hi Daniel

The OpenID4java code is up to date to DRAFT 11, and also has support  
for the OpenID Attribute Exchange draft.

(Sxip volunteered to build the OpenID Java libraries, and our  
preference was to use code.google.com for the repository)

-- Dick

On 18-Jan-07, at 11:52 PM, Daniel E. Renfer wrote:

 I'm a little confused. You list Heraldry as being OpenID Auth 2.0
 enabled, but looking at the SVN logs it seems like only the python
 library has been seeing activity. (And all of that in a flood of
 commits)

 Is there any word on when we will see the rest of the libraries
 brought up to spec? I'm looking for Java support in particular. Will
 there be many major changes upgrading from the current code to the
 Auth2.0 code?

 I want to code my site (still in private development) to be 2.0
 friendly from the get go, but I'm not sure if I should be using the
 openid4java code or wait for Heraldry to be updated.

 -- 
 Daniel E. Renfer
 http://kronkltd.net/


 On 1/18/07, Recordon, David [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
 So with great pleasure I get to announce the culmination of about  
 nine
 months of work between the OpenID, XRI, Sxip, and LID communities  
 in the
 drafting of OpenID Authentication 2.0.  This evening the editors have
 published the final draft of the spec, which we now feel is in a  
 solid
 state for public implementations.

 There are already implementations in various languages
 (http://svn.apache.org/repos/asf/incubator/heraldry/libraries/,
 http://code.google.com/p/openid4java/,
 http://code.google.com/p/openid4perl/) supporting this spec and more
 will emerge over the next few weeks.

 There will be another draft of the spec before it is considered  
 final,
 though unless unforeseen implementation problems emerge these changes
 will be further wordsmithing and cleanup.

 http://openid.net/specs/openid-authentication-2_0-11.html (dated  
 today)

 Cool? Cool!

 --David

 ___
 specs mailing list
 specs@openid.net
 http://openid.net/mailman/listinfo/specs



___
specs mailing list
specs@openid.net
http://openid.net/mailman/listinfo/specs