|
Does Verizon's Voyager stack up to the iPhone? |
|
|
5 IT skills that won't boost your salary 
[1,407]
Women 4 times more likely than men to cough up personal info [589]
Japan's 10 funniest tech-related commercials [Videos] [407]
Throwing away a promo CD is "unauthorized distribution"? [1,265]
Adults too quick to dismiss educational video games [682]
Attack of the iPhone clones [Slideshow] [578]
10 things IT needs to know about AJAX [1,258]
This Year's 25 Geekiest 25th Anniversaries [Slideshow] [409]
|
|
3-part ID model
Pat, Robin -
Now guys, you know I respect your opinions, but neither the SAML model nor Kerberos is anything like the 3-part user-centric model hat is OpenID. Those are analogous to the movie theater model - you go to the booth, get a ticket and give it to the doorman. But there's no user control of the data stored with the ticket booth - in fact there is no data stored there. Nor does the user have any control over the data exchanged with the "relying party" (the doorman).
The Sxip model upon which OpenID is based, gives the user the ability to decide not only which data is exchanged with the relying party but also which data is stored with the IdP.
As for the need of a trust relationship between the IdP and the RP - there does have to be one, but it can be analogous to the one between the User & the RP. I'll expand on that at vquill.com.