[arch-general] Unificate login credentials in Arch's website
I don't know if this was addressed before, I'm sorry to say this and you'll probably hate me but it's something that get my attention: the authentication in Arch's website is, at least, very unefficient. At worst, it's directly against Arch's Way, I think (I'm not the best guy to say this, just giving my first steps in Arch). Why should someone need to register at least three times, one for the forums, one for the wiki and one for the AUR? Shoudn't be sufficient with just one-time login/registration? And what about editing own nick or password? You know, at any time you may want to uniform all your passwords to a master one or just change it from the default you get when registered. I would like to know if there's any specific reason to have three separate accounts for the same website sections. Regards, Martín
On Mon, 2 Aug 2010 23:46:41 -0300, Martín Cigorraga <martosurf7600@gmail.com> wrote:
I don't know if this was addressed before, I'm sorry to say this and you'll probably hate me but it's something that get my attention: the authentication in Arch's website is, at least, very unefficient. At worst, it's directly against Arch's Way, I think (I'm not the best guy to say this, just giving my first steps in Arch). Why should someone need to register at least three times, one for the forums, one for the wiki and one for the AUR? Shoudn't be sufficient with just one-time login/registration? And what about editing own nick or password? You know, at any time you may want to uniform all your passwords to a master one or just change it from the default you get when registered.
I would like to know if there's any specific reason to have three separate accounts for the same website sections.
Regards, Martín
In fact I already wrote a Plugin for MediaWiki to authenticate at the forums. I am using this at archlinux.de (yes, pretty simple and there is no ldap or whatever) So, enabling this at archlinux.org would just involve a small config change. However: the migration is most likely unsolvable. People might have registered different accounts on wiki or forums; or different people have registered the same account the first on the wiki the other one on the forums etc. Pierre -- Pierre Schmitz, https://users.archlinux.de/~pierre
On Tue, Aug 3, 2010 at 08:30, Pierre Schmitz <pierre@archlinux.de> wrote:
On Mon, 2 Aug 2010 23:46:41 -0300, Martín Cigorraga <martosurf7600@gmail.com> wrote:
I don't know if this was addressed before, I'm sorry to say this and you'll probably hate me but it's something that get my attention: the authentication in Arch's website is, at least, very unefficient. At worst, it's directly against Arch's Way, I think (I'm not the best guy to say this, just giving my first steps in Arch). Why should someone need to register at least three times, one for the forums, one for the wiki and one for the AUR? Shoudn't be sufficient with just one-time login/registration? And what about editing own nick or password? You know, at any time you may want to uniform all your passwords to a master one or just change it from the default you get when registered.
I would like to know if there's any specific reason to have three separate accounts for the same website sections.
Regards, Martín
In fact I already wrote a Plugin for MediaWiki to authenticate at the forums. I am using this at archlinux.de (yes, pretty simple and there is no ldap or whatever)
So, enabling this at archlinux.org would just involve a small config change. However: the migration is most likely unsolvable. People might have registered different accounts on wiki or forums; or different people have registered the same account the first on the wiki the other one on the forums etc.
One way to solve it would be to add a fourth set of credentials :-) For instance OpenID. /M -- Magnus Therning (OpenPGP: 0xAB4DFBA4) magnus＠therning．org Jabber: magnus＠therning．org http://therning.org/magnus identi.ca|twitter: magthe
2010/8/3 Magnus Therning <magnus@therning.org>
One way to solve it would be to add a fourth set of credentials :-) For instance OpenID.
/M
-- Magnus Therning (OpenPGP: 0xAB4DFBA4) magnus＠therning．org Jabber: magnus＠therning．org http://therning.org/magnus identi.ca|twitter: magthe
I also think having OpenID would be create,
On Tue, 3 Aug 2010 11:23:49 +0300 jesse jaara <jesse.jaara@gmail.com> wrote:
2010/8/3 Magnus Therning <magnus@therning.org>
One way to solve it would be to add a fourth set of credentials :-) For instance OpenID.
I never understood why there is a need for openid when there are client ssl certificates. I never got why ssl client certs never took off. But maybe that's just me. Dieter
On Tue, Aug 3, 2010 at 09:35, Dieter Plaetinck <dieter@plaetinck.be> wrote:
On Tue, 3 Aug 2010 11:23:49 +0300 jesse jaara <jesse.jaara@gmail.com> wrote:
2010/8/3 Magnus Therning <magnus@therning.org>
One way to solve it would be to add a fourth set of credentials :-) For instance OpenID.
I never understood why there is a need for openid when there are client ssl certificates. I never got why ssl client certs never took off. But maybe that's just me.
Because it's a bit of a usability pain. It works fine when the SSL cert is tied to a client *machine*, not so well when the SSL cert is tied to a *user*. /M -- Magnus Therning (OpenPGP: 0xAB4DFBA4) magnus＠therning．org Jabber: magnus＠therning．org http://therning.org/magnus identi.ca|twitter: magthe
On 08/03/2010 11:58 AM, Magnus Therning wrote:
On Tue, Aug 3, 2010 at 09:35, Dieter Plaetinck<dieter@plaetinck.be> wrote:
On Tue, 3 Aug 2010 11:23:49 +0300 jesse jaara<jesse.jaara@gmail.com> wrote:
2010/8/3 Magnus Therning<magnus@therning.org>
One way to solve it would be to add a fourth set of credentials :-) For instance OpenID.
I never understood why there is a need for openid when there are client ssl certificates. I never got why ssl client certs never took off. But maybe that's just me.
Because it's a bit of a usability pain. It works fine when the SSL cert is tied to a client *machine*, not so well when the SSL cert is tied to a *user*.
/M
This was raised multiple times. But like the package signing none of this users _want_ to actually work on this. -- Ionuț
On Tue, 3 Aug 2010 09:58:15 +0100 Magnus Therning <magnus@therning.org> wrote:
On Tue, Aug 3, 2010 at 09:35, Dieter Plaetinck <dieter@plaetinck.be> wrote:
On Tue, 3 Aug 2010 11:23:49 +0300 jesse jaara <jesse.jaara@gmail.com> wrote:
2010/8/3 Magnus Therning <magnus@therning.org>
One way to solve it would be to add a fourth set of credentials :-) For instance OpenID.
I never understood why there is a need for openid when there are client ssl certificates. I never got why ssl client certs never took off. But maybe that's just me.
Because it's a bit of a usability pain. It works fine when the SSL cert is tied to a client *machine*, not so well when the SSL cert is tied to a *user*.
Still, unified logins is a problem we're having for years. and many people have 1 main pc. If browser programmers would implement a small and easily accessible "account manager" which uses client ssl certificates (and web server/application developers would make client ssl certificates a bit more userfriendly) then we would have a much better and cleaner unified login system then openid, as far as i can see. Dieter
On Tue, 3 Aug 2010 13:32:36 +0200, Dieter Plaetinck <dieter@plaetinck.be> wrote:
Still, unified logins is a problem we're having for years. and many people have 1 main pc. If browser programmers would implement a small and easily accessible "account manager" which uses client ssl certificates (and web server/application developers would make client ssl certificates a bit more userfriendly) then we would have a much better and cleaner unified login system then openid, as far as i can see.
The point of OpenID is that it leaves the choice of the authentication method to the user. For instance, you could use OpenID with SSL certs if you choose a provider like https://certifi.ca/. -- catwell
participants (7)
-
Dieter Plaetinck
-
Ionuț Bîru
-
jesse jaara
-
Magnus Therning
-
Martín Cigorraga
-
Pierre Chapuis
-
Pierre Schmitz