There must be a special version of Godwin's Law for the identerati, where it's only a matter of time before a discussion descends to definitions.
I was trying really hard to communicate some points in plain language. Attributes are things we need to know about people. Passwords are things we never want anyone to know. So passwords cannot be attributes about users (in fact we urge people to pick passwords that do not reveal their traits).
Can't we talk about that without arguing identification vs authentication vs authorization, and going to dictionaries at twenty paces?
And can't we once and for all recognise that there must be something wrong with the very idea of IDAM terminology? Every year or so, an email list breaks out with a debate like this, and it gets bogged down in definitions. Every single time.
Does no one see what that means? It's not that the definitions are wrong. It's that definitions aren't helping. We need to drop the arbitrary jargon, and use plain language to describe what we think about stuff.
The never-ending arguments are pathogical! They point to a disease!
See also [ http://lockstep.com.au/blog/2011/01/22/forget-authentication ]( http://lockstep.com.au/blog/2011/01/22/forget-authentication )
Cheers,
Steve.
Stephen Wilson
Lockstep
W: http://lockstep.com.au
T: @steve_lockstep
Lockstep Consulting provides independent specialist advice and analysis
on digital identity and privacy. Lockstep Technologies develops unique
new smart ID solutions that enhance privacy and prevent identity theft.
-----Original Message-----
From: "Jim Willeke"
HI ID Pro's
As those of you know who attended the ID-Pro breakfast at RSA.. I'm in the new Masters of Science in Identity Management and Security at UT Austin.
There have been some challenges in what has been taught... including that the factors of authentication are not that...but "identifying Information" or as in the poster below says "Identity Attributes"
They also have taught that password are identifiers (yes this was actually taught)... in this poster on the other side they are identity attributes..yes identity attributes. Sigh. I have raised issues about these two things that have been taught...and well not gotten very far. (besides being told i'm a "bad student" and "unwilling to learn".
But now they have this fabulous poster. I'm hoping some of you with blogs or twitter handles can point at the poster - references it and explain why both things are wrong. (cause they, specifically Dr. Barber and Dr. Doty don't believe me.
Or maybe this group could write a joint letter explaining its 'wrongness" it snot great that this center is putting out this information...it doesn't help us in the long run get explaining this stuff right.
Here is the post on their site with the poster. [ https://identity.utexas.edu/infographics/identity-attributes-and-the-identit... ]( https://identity.utexas.edu/infographics/identity-attributes-and-the-identit... )
Here is Dr Barbers faculty page - [ http://www.ece.utexas.edu//people/faculty/suzanne-barber ]( http://www.ece.utexas.edu//people/faculty/suzanne-barber )
Dr. Doty's
[ https://www.ischool.utexas.edu/people/person_details?PersonID=22 ]( https://www.ischool.utexas.edu/people/person_details?PersonID=22 )
_______________________________________________ DG-IDPro mailing list [ DG-IDPro@kantarainitiative.org ]( mailto:DG-IDPro@kantarainitiative.org ) [ http://kantarainitiative.org/mailman/listinfo/dg-idpro ]( http://kantarainitiative.org/mailman/listinfo/dg-idpro )
_______________________________________________ DG-IDPro mailing list [ DG-IDPro@kantarainitiative.org ]( mailto:DG-IDPro@kantarainitiative.org ) [ http://kantarainitiative.org/mailman/listinfo/dg-idpro ]( http://kantarainitiative.org/mailman/listinfo/dg-idpro ) _______________________________________________ DG-IDPro mailing list [ DG-IDPro@kantarainitiative.org ]( mailto:DG-IDPro@kantarainitiative.org ) [ http://kantarainitiative.org/mailman/listinfo/dg-idpro ]( http://kantarainitiative.org/mailman/listinfo/dg-idpro )