Requiring Pseudonymous Identifier

[David Recordon]

Does it make more sense to use a PAPE policy requesting a pseudonymous  
identifier or an AX attribute requesting one?  Any of these approaches  
would work, I just don't think we've mapped out the pros/cons of each.

--David

On May 13, 2009, at 8:44 AM, George Fletcher wrote:

> I don't think OpenID should specify how pseudonymous identifiers are  
> generated. That should be up to the OP. But I like the idea of using  
> a fixed URI as the claimed_id value to specify the behavior desired  
> by the RP. If, however, we need to grow this to cover anonymous  
> based identifiers (i.e. the claims based models from earlier in this  
> thread) then it might make sense to look at a PAPE extension that  
> covers the type of identifier requested.
>
> Thanks,
> George
>
> Nat Sakimura wrote:
>> Sorry for a slow response. This week is especially busy for me...
>>
>> I borrowed the notion from Austrian Citizen ID system.
>> In there, the services are divided into "sectors."
>> A sector may span several agencies.
>> They call ID as PIN (Personal Identification Number).
>>
>> There is a secret PIN (sPIN) which is not used anywhere but in  
>> their SmartCard.
>> Then, sector sepcific PIN (ssPIN) is calculated in the manner of :
>>
>> SHA1(sPIN + SectorID)
>>
>> (Note, there is a bit more details but...)
>>
>> I have thrown OP secret into it.
>> To avoid the analytic attack, I agree that it is better to use
>> individual secret, as some of you
>> points out.
>>
>> Regards,
>>
>> =nat
>>
>> On Tue, May 12, 2009 at 5:55 PM, Dick Hardt <dick.hardt at gmail.com>  
>> wrote:
>>
>>> On 12-May-09, at 1:36 AM, Nat Sakimura wrote:
>>>
>>>> Reason for using RP's Subject in XRD instead of simply using  
>>>> realm is
>>>> to allow for something like group identifier.
>>>>
>>> would you elaborate on the group identifier concept?
>>>
>>>
>>>> This is just one idea. Downside of this approach
>>>> is that we need to set up a WG.
>>>>
>>>> I am sure there are more ideas. It might be possible to utilize AX
>>>> so that it will only be a profile that does not require a WG.
>>>>
>>>> So shall we start discussing which direction we want to go forward?
>>>>
>>> sure!
>>>
>>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
> _______________________________________________
> specs mailing list
> specs at openid.net
> http://openid.net/mailman/listinfo/specs