IBM to Open Source Novel Identity Protection Software

coondoggie handed us a link to a Network World article reporting that IBM plans to open source the project 'Identity Mixer'. Developed by a Zurich-based research lab for the company, Identity Mixer is a novel approach to protecting user identities online. The project, which is a piece of XML-based software, uses a type of digital certificate to control who has access to identity information in a web browser. IBM is enthusiastic about widespread adoption of this technology, and so plans to open source the project through the Eclipse Open Source Foundation. The company hopes this tactic will see the software's use in commercial, medical, and governmental settings.

a novel approach

Developed by a Zurich-based research lab for the company, Identity Mixer is a novel approach to protecting user identities online.

which novel? I hope not 1984.

Glad it's Friday

Anyone else read that as Novell Identity Protection Software and thought WTF? It is definitely beer-thirty.

The right hand does't know what the left is doing

Anyone remember maybe a year or two ago when IBM was doing something with rather intrusive software to mine data on people?

It seems IBM doesn't really have a clear policy on whether to be Good or Evil. They seem to try doing both at the same time...

Guess we need to label IBM as Chaotic Neutral...

Re:The right hand does't know what the left is doi

IBM's been like that for a long time. Remember when the PC division refused to sell the company's own operating system? (Of course, the PC division ended up being sold to a Chinese company, so I guess the OS/2 developers got the last laugh, but a bit too little too late.)

Big, diverse companies often seem to be going in several directions at once, and in this industry, pretty much nobody is bigger or more diverse than IBM (still).

ms passport

what, you mean people don't like ms passport?

What's really new?

I mean what's new in this compared to current LiveJournal's OpenID [openid.net] ?

Haven't We Seen This Before?

From what I read in the article (and I could be wrong, I admit), it sounds like people are simply controlling the amount of personal information that goes to the third party. So, I want to buy something, and only the pertinent information goes to the vendor.

How is this different from things that have been tried in the past? Furthermore, how is this different from the various other situations we hear about occurring at financial institutions and the like, where a database is inadvertently printed or placed outside a firewall (or whatever)?

What makes this better than me simply typing my credit card number into the secure web site of an online store (or have I missed the intended purpose)?

It's about time!

Thank God! Seriously, whoever thought that doing web security within HTML forms was a good idea really needs to be taken to the shed.

Novell Identity Protection Software

Am I the only one who read the title and thought Novell instead of novel?

more details on the project

can be found here [ibm.com].

Algorithms and code can't fix power imbalances

Today if you want to conduct virtually any kind of commerce over the Net, you have to provide a whole dossier of information about yourself. Whether this information is technically necessary or not is irrelevant -- if virtually all companies demand it, then individuals will have to provide it.

So here's some technology that allows you to anonymize your data or just not send it in the first place; what is the incentive for businesses to adopt this technology (at great cost to them)? Perhaps in Europe it will be mandated by law but I don't have any hope here in the USA.

Patented?

idemix [ibm.com] which is the software in question appears to be covered by a number of patent applications [uspto.gov] submitted by the inventor, Jan Camenisch. What's the point in open-sourcing it if IBM has half a dozen or more patents covering the technology being used? Or will this process grant use of any IBM-owned patents necessary to run the code? And if so, what happens as people start modifying the code; how far can they go and still be indemnified against IBM patent infringement?

Patents and open source don't mix well. I don't see how this is going to work.

CardSpace

This sounds similar in concept if not execution to CardSpace (http://msdn2.microsoft.com/en-us/netframework/aa6 63320.aspx/ [microsoft.com]).
Any thoughts on this?

Do you need this, if set to "no one and never"?

The project, which is a piece of XML-based software, uses a type of digital certificate to control who has access to identity information in a web browser.

Well now, that certainly seems like a complicated way to deny all cookies, disable the browser cache, block most "web bug" images, and have FireFox's "Clear Private Data" tool set to purge everything on closing the browser.

All these companies trying to make it "easier" for me to share my info with those who I "trust" have completely missed the point - I don't trust any of them!

I fill out every forced (yeah, not really "forced", in that I have a choice of not getting that content - Let's not play naive here) registration form with completely bogus personal info[1]. If it needs a "real" email address to send some sort of login info or an annoying "you must respond to this to activate your account" message, I make a one-off email address, get the message, and delete the address. Even most "real-world" companies with whom I do business don't have my real contact info - If I want to talk to them, I'll call; I don't really care if they want to talk to me.

We need to take back our privacy. Letting companies even pretend they have the right to talk to us without our initiating the conversation, goes too far. Tools like the one described show that not only do they think they can talk to us, but that we might even want to share our info with them.


1) You need to explain this concept to your non-geek friends and relatives. It absolutely shocks most people when I tell them that "Yes Virginia, you can lie" when a website asks for your name or email address.

Re:Open source simple?

Yeah, 'cause clearly, nothing [openbsd.net] is more secure than a closed source [microsoft.com] solution. Security by obscurity is the ONLY ANSWER! And advice on computer security by random slashdot posters is far more trustworthy than anything from a company that's been making secure systems for longer than most of us have been alive [ibm.com].