[Freedombox-discuss] Identity Management wiki entry

[Melvin Carvalho]

On 13 August 2011 09:43, John Walsh <fiftyfour at waldevin.com> wrote:
> Hi Everybody,
>
> I have reviewed http://wiki.debian.org/FreedomBox/IdentityManagement and
> have the following questions, comments and suggestions. Once agreement is
> reached, i.e. no disagreements on this thread I will update the wiki entry.
>
> First of all I would like to make the observation that the current document
> seems to be primarily concerned about security but touches on user
> management. If this document is concerned with trust management and not user
> management then I apologise now for my comments being off-topic about this
> wiki entry. I have also broadened the scope of user management to include
> people in every context.
>
> Before I write about user management, I would like to mention some
> differences I see between people in the real world and the online world. In
> the real world, a multi-lingual person speaks to different groups in their
> own languages, i.e. some group members may only understand the groups
> language. In the online world, multi-lingual people (correct me if this
> assumption is wrong) are happy to receive content in different languages as
> a single (activity) stream. However, the "mono-lingual" people only want to
> see the multi-lingual posts of their language and for this reason websites
> stream content based on language, e.g. en.wikinews.org, de.wikinews.org,
> en.ogmaciel.com, pt.ogmaciel.com. Does this mean multi-lingual people should
> have a different username for each language for the benefit of their
> "mono-lingual" audience?
>
> In the real world, when an activist says something controversial this may go
> unnoticed by most of their friends through the anonymity of the real world.
> Even those friends present at the time could have been surprised by the
> activists comments, but being human they may forget over time. However, in
> the online world there would be a permanent record of the activists comments
> - the internet never forgets. If the FBX is to accommodate this need, should
> the FBX manage two domains, one for personal usernames and one for activist
> usernames? Can you have 2 domains on the same IP address?
>
> Below are the existing Glossary entries
>
> Owner(s): Administrative account on the FreedomBox.
>
> User(s): refers to system user, which would be the login used to connect to
> a FreedomBox account.
>
> Identit{y,ies}: refers to a virtual (or service) identity.
>
> I would like to propose the following glossary entries;
>
> *Owner*
> The FBX Administrative Account
>
> *Local*
> One or many Local Area Network user accounts. Each Local has system user
> login access to a FBX.
>
> *Username*
> One or many username's (username at domain.tld) per account. Should there be
> one username per language?
>
> *Profile*
> Profiles can be based on relationships and language. Profiles are used to
> control the release of personal identifiable and personal information.
>
> *Contact*
> Address book of Local.
>
> *Guest*
> One or many contacts with Guest login access to the FBX. A Guest account is
> required to store your friends backup or for friends who only have an email
> address, i.e. no social network account. Each contact is associated with a
> profile through a defined relationship.
>
> *Circle*
> Lists of contacts. There will be lists for relationships which will be
> automatically updated when there is a new Guest. There can be custom lists
> with contacts and/or guests (guests are a subset of contacts).
>
> *Group*
> Private (invite only) and moderated and public forums/conferences for
> members
>
> *Member*
> Public access to Group login on the FBX
>
> *Subscriber*
> A "follower" of the public stream
>
> The existing *features* are listed below
>
> The User/Identity management must enforce privacy and avoid leaks of
> informations.
>
> Users/Owners of a FreedomBox should be able to have several Identities.
>
> Identities must not be linked publicly to a User.
>
> Identities or Users may not be linked to a Legal Name.
>
> Identities should be able to use several services, not always hosted on the
> same FreedomBox. Thus there should be a way to publish this information,
> either publicly or privately.
>
> There must be strong ways to authenticate an Identity as well as a User.
>
> There must be strong ways to verify a Identity ownership.
>
> I would be grateful if somebody could explain bullet point 5 and the last
> bullet point. I would also like to propose "identity" in the feature list
> above be replaced with username, a label more familiar to users. I would
> also like to propose the "Using GNUPG" section be replaced with "Security".
>
> Some of my glossary entries seem a bit long and I am wondering should some
> of the glossary characteristics be listed as a feature. I also wonder where
> should I place the scenarios described above - should I add them to the user
> stories wiki entry?
>
> If people agree with broadening the scope of the entry I would like to
> rename the wiki entry to user management. All feedback is welcome.

Nice wrap up.

This might be helpful too

http://www.w3.org/2005/Incubator/socialweb/XGR-socialweb-20101206/#Terminology

The report from December last year, was several years of study of the
identity landscape, invited experts from pretty much every major group
had input and gave presentations.

>
> -- fiftyfour
>
>
>
>
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> Freedombox-discuss mailing list
> Freedombox-discuss at lists.alioth.debian.org
> http://lists.alioth.debian.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/freedombox-discuss
>