[OpenID] FW: Google Blogger and openid. Does it really work? (today?)

[Peter Williams]

Even more astounding, the handoff from the myopenid personal page's micro tag worked (as referenced from the comment, left on John's blog). The "HomePage" data-readable embedded URL did properly invoke the Trustbearer-hosted gateway between openid2 and the (Rapattoni) SAML2 service for Realty MLSs.

I had turned that SAML2/OpenID2 gatewaying stuff off, while I investigated the Shibboleth variant of SAML2 (hoping to learn the "essence" of SAML, from the folks who participated in its design). Took me 5 minutes to make it work again - mostly figuring out how to make all the proxying/gatewaying connections all "active" again.

So, not only is the myopenid/OP<->trustbearer/Consumer OpenID2 channel still working  fine (not a surprise), the trustbearer service gatewaying the consumer session over to the (Rapattoni) SAML2 world is still working fine too! My understanding from TrustBearer folks, is that they now also have a native OpenID/SAML gateway , too - one that doesn't require Rapattoni/PingFederate5 SAML server to proxy SAML IDP domains together.

Peter.


From: general-bounces at openid.net [mailto:general-bounces at openid.net] On Behalf Of Peter Williams
Sent: Monday, July 28, 2008 11:40 AM
To: general at openid.net
Subject: [OpenID] FW: Google Blogger and openid. Does it really work? (today?)

I have confirmed that I, with absolutely no fuss and with everything in perfect, seemless working order, just left a authenticated comment on the abstrationeer site (a Google blogger hosted site, I believe).

The trial used myopenid as the OP, and its phonefactor phone call back to my registered cell phone. That is, three open source (and no a priori agreement) providers worked seemlessly together, in a true websso experience.

It worked exactly as one would expect, with the UCI model.

It did NOT require a Google session to exist, unlike trials of 4 months ago. Bug fixed! Somewhere!

Everything that flows from that (now false) assumption (that Google session was required, by design) are obviously false conclusions :- Google policy on tracking  anonymous-authenticated comments, assumed motivating legal issues.




All I ever wanted to do of course was use a major RP. I wanted to prove the point __by demonstration__ that major sites had accomplished RP adoption. For the first time, I can declare (mostly to myself), it works, its live, and its real. This counters some of the FUD levied by others (in the SAML world), that OpenID is "not real" ... and there is "no where to go" with it. Of course there is. There are evidently a billion potential blog sites.

Anyone know if one has to "arm" the Blogger blogsite to accept openids? As I recall, one had to do something to arm openid support.: i.e. it was not on by default. But, my memory of configuring my blogger account all those months ago, has mostly faded.

Peter.


From: John Panzer [mailto:john at johnpanzer.com] On Behalf Of John Panzer
Sent: Tuesday, March 25, 2008 3:22 PM
To: Peter Williams
Cc: general at openid.net
Subject: Re: [OpenID] Google Blogger and openid. Does it really work? (today?)

Blogger is currently at OpenID 1.1 and doesn't yet support i-names (@blog*lockbox).  I was able to publish a comment using http://jpanzer.myopenid.com/.  Obviously I can't test the others :).

http://www.abstractioneer.org is OpenID-comment-enabled.

Peter Williams wrote:
Can someone point me at a Google blogger endpoint that has recently accepted their openid, please?

On a particular blogsite, all I get is "OpenID url is missing", for @blog*lockbox, http://rapattoni.trustbearer.com/lockbox, and homepw.myopenid.com












________________________________










_______________________________________________

general mailing list

general at openid.net<mailto:general at openid.net>

http://openid.net/mailman/listinfo/general



-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.openid.net/pipermail/openid-general/attachments/20080728/c789088f/attachment-0002.htm>