[OpenID] is openid 2.0 a lightweight identity system?
rob
robyates70 at gmail.com
Thu Feb 8 15:29:14 UTC 2007
I took a look at the Openid Authentication 2.0 spec for the first time
recently. I thought it would be as simple as either the original openid
spec or the DIX spec (hacked up my own DIX implementation in a day or
two, loved it)
However 2.0 now seems to be a merger of these two specs. with a sprinkle
of "xri" just for good measure. What this has produced is not as
intuitive as either of its predecessors and I wonder whether it can
still coin the phrase "lightweight".
If I am understanding this new spec correctly to implement support from
scratch an rp needs to understand openid (currently 56 pages), yadis
resolution (22 pages), xri resolution (currently 74 pages) and probably
xri's themselves (33 pages). This no longer seems like a lightweight
identity system to me (and there is no way I could now hack a complete
system (op and rp) together in a few days).
I understand the trade offs and compromises that need to be made during
a specs development, but has it drifted away from what I thought was its
initial mandate, namely to provide a lightweight, i.e. easy to implement
from scratch, federated identity system (we already have SAML).
Anyway, a couple questions for you all,
Does openid really need two optional ways of verifying the signatures
i.e. shared secret and direct request, can't we just pick one?
Does openid really need to support xri identifiers in the core, can't
this be separated? This would remove 107 pages of additional
specification reading and reduce the size of the openid spec.
I hope this e-mail isn't viewed as negative, I just hadn't looked at
what had been happening recently and wanted to pass on my gut reaction
to the new spec. I also see that a lot of this has been debated on the
mailing list before so apologies for rehashing old ground.
Rob
More information about the general
mailing list