Re: Gnome to be based on .NET?

On Tue, 2002-02-05 at 13:02, Tom Caudron wrote:
> Sean Middleditch said, "Heck, if the Open Source community could form a very
> powerful/fast/secure authentication server for .Net, and *advertised* it
> properly (Free Software never does that enough, or least, they idiotically
> advertise to their existing users) any large on-line service would offer
> both Hailstorm authentication *and* auth against the Open database."
> At this point we are /way/ off topic, but since you mentioned it, here's
> your open source authentication service that competes with MS Passport, AOL
> Magic Carpet, etc....

Off topic.  Good point.  Sorry.  ^,^


Aye.  I'm reading up on that right now, actually.

> So far, one company ( has established a server using
> the open XNS protocol.
> There is not one thing standing in the way of a developer making a .NET app
> that uses this web-based authentication service instead of Passport.
> Passport is not ingrained in the .NET architecture except in so far as their
> marketers can convince you that it is.  In fact, this service screams for a
> .NET api.  Perhaps Mono could provide that.

Yes, as I was going to mention (I'm rereading a lot of stuff on Mono and
.NET), look at  It quite clearly
explains the issues regarding Passport, authentication, and exactly how
Microsoft is *NOT* in control of Mono or any software based on Mono.

> It's also worth noting that the service provided (purportedly?) by Passport
> and other similar services is a valuable and needed one.  Non-repudiation is
> the first step towrds a trust-based architecture and a trust-based
> architecture is the first step toward real p2p business-class services.  In
> the end, it has to be done if real commerce is going to occur online.  I
> hope MS stays in the authentication market, as I hope AOL does and OneName
> and many others.  Competition breeds competence.  Personally, I chose
> OneName as my authentication service.  Bear in mind that these
> infrastructures don't come free.  Someone has to pay, and it's likely to be
> us (until such time as a non-repudiatable authentication server can be run
> by individuals...which is a VERY long way off).

OK, now tho, with OneName, I have to pay for an identity.  However, I
can easily get one for free with PassPort.

Technically, and even "ethically," we can see that OneName is the better
service.  95% of the world doesn't give a damn about those reasons,
tho.  They just want it to be easy, and be free.

> Tom Caudron
> XNS Name "=Tom Caudron"
> _______________________________________________
> gnome-list mailing list
> gnome-list gnome org

[Date Prev][Date Next]   [Thread Prev][Thread Next]   [Thread Index] [Date Index] [Author Index]