Full Disclosure mailing list archives

Re: OpenID. The future of authentication on the web?


From: "John C. A. Bambenek, GCIH, CISSP" <bambenek.infosec () gmail com>
Date: Mon, 24 Mar 2008 10:29:13 -0500

I'm not saying OpenID is more convenient and has benefits... I was just
saying there are conventions to make passwords unique per-site.

So if you don't mind getting past the single point of 0wnership, then OpenID
is good to go.  Me, I don't trust technology.

On Mon, Mar 24, 2008 at 10:27 AM, Petko D. Petkov <
pdp.gnucitizen () googlemail com> wrote:

as I said, some websites ask you for a username regardless whether
that will be an email address. and unfortunately a username is not
unique through out the Web. which means that if your username is
john-bambenek on one system it could be completely different on
another system due the fact that some vendors don't like the "-" or
they don't like the length or they ask you to have a number in the
username or even they provide you with such. So keeping track of
usernames is as hard as keeping track of passwords. Put them all
together and then you will experience the pain.

On the other hand OpenID provides you with a unique ID. Only you can
use it on every system without the need to worry.

On Mon, Mar 24, 2008 at 3:22 PM, John C. A. Bambenek, GCIH, CISSP
<bambenek.infosec () gmail com> wrote:
Well in my case it's easy... how many people do you know named John
Bambenek
(my father doesn't count)? :)

I was just speaking about passwords in that case, presumably people can
remember their email addresses.



On Mon, Mar 24, 2008 at 10:17 AM, Petko D. Petkov
<pdp.gnucitizen () googlemail com> wrote:
what about usernames? you still need to keep track of your usernames
since sometimes your preferred username is either taken or not
possible or you need to login via email or any other peculiarity the
site supports.




On Mon, Mar 24, 2008 at 2:43 PM, John C. A. Bambenek, GCIH, CISSP
<bambenek.infosec () gmail com> wrote:
I would disagree.  One could simply create a template password and
then
salt
it with some acronym for the site in question.

For instance, S0m3p4ss!### where ### is a 3-letter acronym for the
site
they
are accessing.  Still need only one password to remember and you
don't
necessarily have a single point of 0wnership anymore.



On Sun, Mar 23, 2008 at 7:04 PM, Larry Seltzer <
Larry () larryseltzer com>
wrote:

I understand the attractiveness of not having to remember lots
of
IDs
and passwords, but when you give up control of your data, you give
up
control of your future.

Normal people aren't going to remember enough passwords, let alone
strong passwords, to make that control meaningful. I do get your
point,
but I bet that the best alternative is to give them one set of
credentials and make it as strong as possible.


Larry Seltzer
eWEEK.com Security Center Editor
http://security.eweek.com/
http://blogs.pcmag.com/securitywatch/
Contributing Editor, PC Magazine
larry.seltzer () ziffdavisenterprise com

_______________________________________________



Full-Disclosure - We believe in it.
Charter: http://lists.grok.org.uk/full-disclosure-charter.html
Hosted and sponsored by Secunia - http://secunia.com/



_______________________________________________
 Full-Disclosure - We believe in it.
 Charter: http://lists.grok.org.uk/full-disclosure-charter.html
 Hosted and sponsored by Secunia - http://secunia.com/







--

Petko D. (pdp) Petkov | GNUCITIZEN | Hakiri | Spin Hunters

gnucitizen.org | hakiri.org | spinhunters.org






--

Petko D. (pdp) Petkov | GNUCITIZEN | Hakiri | Spin Hunters

gnucitizen.org | hakiri.org | spinhunters.org

_______________________________________________
Full-Disclosure - We believe in it.
Charter: http://lists.grok.org.uk/full-disclosure-charter.html
Hosted and sponsored by Secunia - http://secunia.com/

Current thread: