[foaf-protocols] Fwd: openid4.me not working

Seth Russell russell.seth at gmail.com
Sat Sep 11 21:55:11 CEST 2010


On Sat, Sep 11, 2010 at 12:36 PM, Melvin Carvalho
<melvincarvalho at gmail.com>wrote:

>
>
> On 11 September 2010 21:13, Seth Russell <russell.seth at gmail.com> wrote:
>
>> ---------- Forwarded message ----------
>> From: Seth Russell <russell.seth at gmail.com>
>> Date: Sat, Sep 11, 2010 at 11:26 AM
>> Subject: Re: openid4.me not working
>> To: foafme at googlegroups.com
>>
>> > Re reprted by Nicolas17 (see below)
>> >The openid4.me service seems to be broken, leaving
>> > me locked out of several websites, since I used it as my
>> > main OpenID. I just get "Verification of the OpenID URL was cancelled."
>> > from the website.
>>
>> This is exactly why re-authentication (login) to a website or service with
>> your WebID should not be dependent on  verification of the certificate in
>> the profile document.
>>
> *
> Repeating my previous response to you:*
>
>
> The WebID Protocol specification is a work in progress.  I think if you
> have found a flaw, perhaps it's worth persuing on the foaf-protocols mail
> list.  There are active sessions to log an address issues presented.
> Especially if you see it as a show stopper.
>
> As it happens, I dont see that the scenario you present as infeasible using
> the current spec.  WebID verification need only occur on the FIRST
> validation, thereafter it can be cached locally, or in the LOD cloud.
> Additionally, there's no reason that your browser cant also be your WebID.
> Peter Williams has done this using opera unite, and it's possible to do in
> firefox using dynamic DNS.  But as I say, possibly a discussion for foaf
> protocols.
>

I thought one of the reasons for specifying the protocol in writing  is to
guide developers away from choosing to implement in ways that will might
make using WebIDs unreliable.   If the specifications allow for this to
happen, then are not the specifications part of our problem?

Seth

>
>
>>
>> My point is not that there is some little transitory bug over at
>> openid.me and the pain it causes ... my point is that the protocol has
>> been defined so that it is inherently and needlessly unreliable.  It is
>> dependent on the site which issued the WebID to be up and running.  But it
>> doesn't  need that dependence!   Login using WebID need only  be a
>> transaction between the website and the client's browser.
>>
>> Seth Russell
>> Podcasting: tagtalking.net
>> Facebook ing: facebook.com/russell.seth
>> Twitter ing: twitter.com/SethRussell
>> Blogging: fastblogit.com/seth/
>> Catalog selling: www.speaktomecatalog.com
>> Google profile: google.com/profiles/russell.seth
>>
>>
>> On Sat, Sep 11, 2010 at 11:19 AM, Melvin Carvalho <
>> melvincarvalho at gmail.com> wrote:
>>
>>>
>>>
>>> On 11 September 2010 19:50, Seth Russell <russell.seth at gmail.com> wrote:
>>>
>>>> This is exactly why re-authentication (login) to a website or service
>>>> with your WebID should not be dependant on  verification of the certificate
>>>> in the profile document.
>>>>
>>>
>>> Hi Seth.  Sorry you feel impeded that limitation.  I think people are
>>> working on improving authentication options.  But please realize that the
>>> people working on this site are just volunteers, and have limited time to
>>> tackle a wide range of issues.
>>>
>>>
>>>>
>>>> It's also, unfortunately, one of the reasons that i won't use WebID now
>>>> for my sites or my identity.
>>>>
>>>
>>> Unfortunately I dont have access to the openid4.me site.  Akbar is looks
>>> after this, and I have messaged him, but he seems to be away right now.
>>> Hopefully he will reply when he gets back.
>>>
>>> OpenID integration has been tricky from the start, and for some reason
>>> has remained problematic.
>>>
>>> I think after this issue is (hopefully) resolved, it makes sense split
>>> the OpenID and foaf mailing lists, so that we can focus on the respective
>>> issues.
>>>
>>>
>>>>
>>>> Seth Russell
>>>> Podcasting: tagtalking.net
>>>> Facebook ing: facebook.com/russell.seth
>>>> Twitter ing: twitter.com/SethRussell
>>>> Blogging: fastblogit.com/seth/
>>>> Catalog selling: www.speaktomecatalog.com
>>>> Google profile: google.com/profiles/russell.seth
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> On Sat, Sep 11, 2010 at 9:02 AM, Nicolas17 <nicolas.alvarez at gmail.com>wrote:
>>>>
>>>>> The openid4.me service seems to be broken, leaving me locked out of
>>>>> several websites, since I used it as my main OpenID. I just get
>>>>> "Verification of the OpenID URL was cancelled." from the website.
>>>>>
>>>>> The HTML returned from the OpenID URL (
>>>>> http://openid4.me/http://foaf.me/nicolas17%23me
>>>>> ) shows "not found" for name, nickname, and mbox, even though they are
>>>>> definitely specified correctly in the foaf profile. This may be
>>>>> related.
>>>>>
>>>>> --
>>>>> You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google
>>>>> Groups "foaf.me" group.
>>>>> To post to this group, send email to foafme at googlegroups.com.
>>>>> To unsubscribe from this group, send email to
>>>>> foafme+unsubscribe at googlegroups.com<foafme%2Bunsubscribe at googlegroups.com>
>>>>> .
>>>>> For more options, visit this group at
>>>>> http://groups.google.com/group/foafme?hl=en.
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>
>>
>>
>> _______________________________________________
>> foaf-protocols mailing list
>> foaf-protocols at lists.foaf-project.org
>> http://lists.foaf-project.org/mailman/listinfo/foaf-protocols
>>
>
>
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: http://lists.foaf-project.org/pipermail/foaf-protocols/attachments/20100911/e85aa49e/attachment.htm 


More information about the foaf-protocols mailing list