Re: [egov] The Swedish e-Sign Signature Central

["David RR Webber" <david@drrw.info>]

Anders,

The problem also is that people pre-suppose that a single sign-on
is the answer - when in fact it is not.  Peoples behaviour is
multifaceted - and therefore the last thing they want to do
is shackle themselves to one of these central services.

There are definately better solutions and approaches out
there - problem is - noone is listening - they are all trying
to be first-past-the-post to the pot of gold with their
single system - so they can become hugely rich.
Just like with UDDI "push" couple of
years back - even once they have punched this out -
noone will want to buy it - but they just cannot see
that coming.

Fortunately some of their feature-set is salvagable for
use in the real solution.  But they will not listen to
what that is - until their own Edsel has not left any
of the showrooms...

DW.

----- Original Message ----- 
From: "Chiusano Joseph" <chiusano_joseph@bah.com>
To: "Rex Brooks" <rexb@starbourne.com>
Cc: "Anders Rundgren" <anders.rundgren@telia.com>;
<egov@lists.oasis-open.org>
Sent: Sunday, November 30, 2003 8:40 PM
Subject: Re: [egov] The Swedish e-Sign Signature Central


> <Quote>
> the scramble between the Microsoft Passport community and the Sun
> Liberty Alliance community will continue with both saying that they
> applaud the principle of a federated certification for
> single-sign-on,
> </Quote>
>
> Another angle to watch is this one:
>
> (1) WS-Federation
> (2) SAML v2.0
> (3) Liberty Alliance
>
> SAML v2.0 will concentrate more in the area of Federated Network
> Identity, the domain of the Liberty Alliance and WS-Federation (although
> WS-Federation is not an open standard). So it appears that SAML and
> Liberty Alliance are coming closer together in terms of functionality -
> which makes this space quite crowded.
>
> I would look for a merger in this space sometime in the future,
> resulting in 2 specifications rather than 3.
>
> Kind Regards,
> Joe Chiusano
> Booz | Allen | Hamilton
>
> Rex Brooks wrote:
> >
> > Good idea, Anders,
> >
> > I am willing to bet that you will not see a single reply against it.
> > But it won't happen any time soon, as long as there is any
> > significant economic advantage in being the de facto standard in
> > practice, as opposed to being simply one of many federated
> > Certification Authorities for a globally-recognized standard for
> > single sign on, as recognized by US Federal Policy. So until a
> > Presidential Mandate or Congressional Act sets this policy in stone,
> > the scramble between the Microsoft Passport community and the Sun
> > Liberty Alliance community will continue with both saying that they
> > applaud the principle of a federated certification for
> > single-sign-on, while both communities quietly work to undermine the
> > process by achieving that de facto status of installed base
> > recognition. The US extolls the so-called"free" marketplace, but
> > hasn't shown much backbone lately when it comes to standing up to
> > monopolies. However, if the EU develops some larger markeplace
> > muscle, that might sway some opinion. If Sony-Ericsson were behind
> > it, with say France-telecom and Fujuitsu, onboard as well, with some
> > of that marketplace muscle, THAT might make a difference, but with
> > China, Central, Southern and Southeast Asia up for grabs, who has the
> > time? And remember, after that market achieves a moderate amount of
> > stablization in the next phase of economic-industrical development,
> > there will then be Africa getting up to speed, with South America
> > already showing signs of becoming a more lucrative marketplace.
> >
> > I believe there's a word for this. Geopolitics. The truth is, money
> > talks, quietly in the audible portion of the public spectrum, but
> > very loudly behind the scenes. The last thing I want to do is to
> > cause a ruckus, and this TC especially needs to be circumspect about
> > what it says and what arenas it chooses to enter, but inevitably
> > there will come a day when this aspect of our shared reality has to
> > be faced. Unfortunately, while I would once have said that ISO was
> > the more appropriate forum for taking up this work, but with their
> > recent adoption of a policy to charge for their Country Codes, it
> > appears that only OASIS and W3C stand a chance of putting a standard
> > in place that can achieve the actual purpose of single-sign-on.
> >
> > Now, having said all that, let me say that there is a back door that
> > this TC might want to pursue, which would be to balkanize the process
> > while maintaining a single schema standard for the actual information
> > required. By that I mean, make a schema-based standard of the
> > vocabulary required, then immediately start making as many separate,
> > market/country/region/niche segment standards as there are
> > constituencies. Start with web services security and incorporate SAML
> > and XACML within these various standards, making them all virtually
> > identical, but having so many of them that the major economic blocks
> > fighting for market dominance will simply have too many separate
> > little constituencies with which to cost-effectively accommodate or
> > cope, and each of which can add their own little twists in their own
> > little standards. the idea is to make it virtually impossible for the
> > big boys to make any money out of trying to keep up while claiming
> > that their market group represents the "best" combination of reliable
> > services in the global marketplace.
> >
> > In effect, what this does is to make a virtue of what is happening
> > here in OASIS already, with so many small, focused constituencies
> > staking out their own territory. At the same time, if this explosion
> > of small standards is going to eventually lead to some genuine global
> > consensi for broadly based, royalty free, encompassing standards, it
> > can, then, actually come about sooner, with too many small targets
> > for the major multinational corporations to pick off one at a time.
> >
> > Fighting Darwinism is in itself, not a good strategy for long term
> > survival and success. Better to use its own processes to thrive.
> >
> > Ciao,
> > Rex
> > At 10:14 AM +0100 11/29/03, Anders Rundgren wrote:
> > >Ladies and & Gentlemen,
> > >Here is some information regarding e-sign and e-governments.
> > >
> > >Sweden's e-sign solutions for e-Governments
> > >---------------------------------------------------
> > >
> > >Due to the fact that current e-signature client SW is unique, the
> > >Swedish authorities' are planning to set up a "signature central"
> > >which effectively means that all e-sign operations will be
> > >performed in an external and very costly service, instead
> > >of being integrated in the e-government applications
> > >themselves.
> > >
> > >If there had been a working e-sign standard, the "signature central"
> > >would have been redundant.  My study indicates that there are no
> > >conflicts or technical problems having a single e-sign solution
> > >covering both the desktop (Windows, Mac, Linux, etc), as well as
> > >high-end mobile devices.
> > >
> > >I'm sure that we can find EU money for such a development as the
> > >situation is similar in the entire EU.
> > >
> > >So my question is really only: What are we waiting for?
> > >
> > >Anders Rundgren
> > >Consultant, PKI and e-Business
> > >+46 70 - 627 74 37 (on CET)
> > >
> > >Attachment converted: Enterprise:???#2A6A72.pdf (PDF /CARO) (002A6A72)
> > >To unsubscribe from this mailing list (and be removed from the
> > >roster of the OASIS TC), go to
> >
>http://www.oasis-open.org/apps/org/workgroup/egov/members/leave_workgroup.p
hp.
> >
> > --
> > Rex Brooks
> > GeoAddress: 1361-A Addison, Berkeley, CA, 94702 USA, Earth
> > W3Address: http://www.starbourne.com
> > Email: rexb@starbourne.com
> > Tel: 510-849-2309
> > Fax: By Request
> >
> > To unsubscribe from this mailing list (and be removed from the roster of
the OASIS TC), go to
http://www.oasis-open.org/apps/org/workgroup/egov/members/leave_workgroup.php.


----------------------------------------------------------------------------
----


> To unsubscribe from this mailing list (and be removed from the roster of
the OASIS TC), go to
http://www.oasis-open.org/apps/org/workgroup/egov/members/leave_workgroup.php.