To be absolutely clear, this does *not* solve the problem of bots/tools authenticating on behalf of a user. All it does is solve the problem of where a bot/tool authenticates under its own user account and, out of pure courtesy for the community, asks users to prove their identity before allowing them to use the bot/tool. For bots/tools that actually perform edits as the user, OpenID would be useless.
Also, I think Wikipedia acting as an OpenID consumer would be bounds more useful than acting as a provider. That's not to say that having both wouldn't be a good idea, but the consumer side of it should definitely be a priority. Think of sites now like StackOverflow, where creating an account is as simple as pressing a few Accept buttons.
*--* *Tyler Romeo* Stevens Institute of Technology, Class of 2015 Major in Computer Science www.whizkidztech.com | tylerromeo@gmail.com
On Fri, Feb 22, 2013 at 5:37 PM, Ryan Lane rlane32@gmail.com wrote:
On Fri, Feb 22, 2013 at 2:30 PM, Thomas Gries mail@tgries.de wrote:
Ryan wrote:
Any OpenID consumer, whether WMF or not, would be able to use us as an authentication provider.
There is currently no option, but an option (to restrict serving OpenIDs to certain consumer domains eg. only to our domain) could be implemented.
I see no reason in doing so. If third parties want to allow Wikimedia as a provider, I don't see why we'd object.
- Ryan
Wikitech-l mailing list Wikitech-l@lists.wikimedia.org https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikitech-l