Mozilla Offers Alternative To OpenID 105
Orome1 writes "Mozilla has been working for a while now on a new browser-based system for identifying and authenticating users it calls BrowserID, but it's only this month that all of its sites have finally been outfitted with the technology. Mozilla aims for BrowserID to become a more secure alternative to OpenID, the decentralized authentication system offered to users of popular sites such as Google, Yahoo!, PayPal, MySpace and others."
What is wrong with OpenID? (Score:5, Insightful)
- It is widely adopted among many providers
- It does not share any of your information cross-site unless you allow it
- It works
Why do we need yet another standard? I do not see anything in this article, on browserid.org, or anywhere else that breaks down why Browser ID is superior.
Also, I don't see Google Chrome adopting this, since Google backs OpenID, and I don't see Microsoft adopting it either. So really this is going to end up a Firefox only scheme that will never gain enough penetration to make sites want to go to the effort to implement it.
Obligatory xkcd (Score:1, Insightful)
Different problems (Score:5, Insightful)
I think BrowserID and OpenID solve slightly different problems. BrowserID standardized the process of you logging in through your web browser while OpenID is about authenticating yourself through some authority (be it a server controlled by you or some third party). So that's a user-website interaction for BrowserID or website-website for OpenID.
They could actually be used together, any service that accepts OpenID logins could expose a BrowserID interface too.
Re:What, me worry? (Score:5, Insightful)
Locks, and security in general, are intended to raise the cost of unauthorized access beyond the utility of that access. Success by that measure is effective security.
Comment removed (Score:4, Insightful)