[OpenID] general Digest, Vol 37, Issue 20

[John Bradley]

It will be more of an issue for LoA 2 and 3.

I have clear assurances that there is no geographic restriction for  
LoA 1.

We need to test that.

Unfortunately during the development phase the Gov asked the  
foundations not to publicly release any of the information.   That  
made it more difficult to approach international OPs.

I have personally talked to a number of them about participating.   I  
know that Nat has been involved from the start.  One of the first  
conversations in the project involved someone from NRI and I asking  
the GSA about international participation.

I think the large US players wanting to be able to be certified by  
other governments will be an incentive to keep the playing field in  
the US from being too tilted against us foreigners.

John B.

On 2009-09-09, at 8:08 PM, openid-general-request at lists.openid.net  
wrote:

> Date: Wed, 9 Sep 2009 17:07:02 -0700
> From: Johannes Ernst <jernst+openid.net at netmesh.us>
> Subject: Re: [OpenID] owning one's own identity
> To: general List <general at openid.net>
> Message-ID: <D32EDA50-B316-4AC5-9877-367F02763C08 at netmesh.us>
> Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"; Format="flowed";
> 	DelSp="yes"
>
> Opening up the list of accepted IdPs has some weird consequences when
> interacting with the government (as opposed to others)
>
> E.g.:
>
> What about an IdP in Russia or China? Would the US government accept
> identities asserted by an entity outside of the country? What about
> Iran? Before the revolution? And then what?
> What about a multi-national headquartered, in, say, New York? That
> serves some of its identities from a data center in Mexico? If it now
> moved headquarters to Bermuda, what then? What if it was acquired by a
> Chinese company with strong ties to the Chinese government?
>

-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.openid.net/pipermail/openid-general/attachments/20090909/8925f14e/attachment.htm>