Yahoo available AX attrs
Joseph A Holsten
joseph at josephholsten.com
Tue Dec 8 19:20:01 UTC 2009
Yay! top post, bottom post, and now inline commenting in the same day/
list!
On Dec 8, 2009, at 12:28 PM, Breno de Medeiros wrote:
> Comments inline.
>
> On Tue, Dec 8, 2009 at 10:18 AM, Joseph A Holsten
> <joseph at josephholsten.com> wrote:
>> 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.
>
> An RP may trust the OP but have its own policies. For instance, an RP
> may score accounts for 'spamminess', which is not a black-and-white
> concept and a piece of information not available from the OP's
> response. Validation date can be an important piece of information
> enabling more fine-grained evaluation of an assertion.
Sure it's a fine grained solution, but it seems like tweezers when a
shovel is due. If RPs are actually this sophisticated, or lying to
sound this sophisticated, then more power to them. I concede that some
people are making life annoying enough for y'all that you don't need
me bikeshedding.
>> 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?
>
> An additional concern is that it is perfectly compatible with the AX
> standard (some would say the original intent) that the OP asserts
> user-provided values. Indeed, in the absence of a verified email
> address, some RPs would be content to accept unverified ones. Being
> able to express this status allows OPs to expose data at different
> levels of assurance and address different use cases.
Sounds nifty. Any hints as to which RPs have committed to using these
features?
--
j
More information about the specs
mailing list