January 25, 2007 10:22 AM PST

Newsmaker: Liberty Alliance is alive and kicking

See all Newsmakers

(continued from previous page)

Q: Seems that confusion is also not helped by other initiatives that pop up such as Microsoft's CardSpace and Higgins, which is being pushed by Novell and IBM. Is this competition?
Sullivan: First and foremost, you do the market a severe disservice if you set up competition. We think Higgins solves legitimate problems, complementary to Liberty. The average person on the street or even the average enterprise CXO (the X being whatever position one holds) isn't going to be able to articulate exactly where Higgins is complementary to Liberty or where it overlaps. That requires more inclusion, and the attitude on our part to reach across the aisle and, with Higgins, clarify for what they do well and what we do well.

Q: How about Microsoft?
Sullivan: Division does nobody in the industry any good because customers, at the end of the day, want to figure out how to make CardSpace interoperate with other infrastructures. We fully recognize that CardSpace will be a way that customers authenticate into a federated environment. We have to figure out how they work together, and we have to be able to articulate that common vision and purpose to the marketplace. Otherwise the market is going to say, "Hey, I'll just wait till you guys sort it out, call me when it's over, and then I'll start deploying it."

Q: And isn't that essentially what has been going on?
Sullivan: Exactly.

Division does nobody in the industry any good.

Q: Do you have a solution?
Sullivan: Yes, I think the openLiberty Project is a very concrete example of how Liberty is allowing non-Liberty folks to participate in the conversation. Last, June, for the first time ever, we opened up a Liberty meeting to non-Liberty participants. Many of the leaders in the identity world were represented and, from a Liberty perspective, our eyes were opened. We should not view these people as competitors; we should view them as trying to solve a problem that they're trying to articulate as well. Let's help them try to sort that out, let's reveal to them the good work that we've already done, and let them make use of it, if it's appropriate to them to make use of it.

Q: You've been talking about what you call "convergence" of different identity standards for years. How come these things aren't converging?
Sullivan: Because the way that the dialogue has been conducted to this point has been an all or nothing dialogue, and that's true on both sides. The dialogue very quickly degenerates into bits and bytes. There's been this overly focused effort on the technology standards themselves, and who's got to give and who's got to compromise.

Q: So pretty much people had their heels in the sand when there was discussion about convergence. Engineers in particular don't like to give up the work that they've done, or worked on hard on and are proud of.
Sullivan: And who could blame them, but if you sit a customer in front of them and the customer says, "I'm not going to buy either of you until you both figure out how to work together," that sharpens the mind really quick.

Q: Is there change?
Sullivan: The difference today is that we're moving beyond the technology standards. It is a fact that CardSpace will be on millions of desktops with the advent of Windows Vista. It will be there so one has to figure out how to interoperate with it as an identity provider.

Beyond that, there's an attitudinal shift that I think is really important. Around the world, in privacy groups, government agencies, vendors and enterprise customers, there is interest in identity. This is not accidental, I think that there's demand that is leading us toward the knee of the hockey stick in the identity space.

Q: The convergence is happening finally?
Sullivan: It's happening. The dialogue is happening. If we can agree on the essential elements, the 80 percent of what each is trying to accomplish, and then we're adding our own value-added on top of that, great.

You're announcing a focus on open-source developers to get Liberty's work adopted more broadly. You could see this as a sign of desperation, that there are not enough people adopting it today so it needs to be free and open to everybody.
Sullivan: I could understand that point of view, and I could understand someone cynically saying that. What I would say in response to that, however, is that identity management and security is not simple. What we're trying to do with this initiative is open the doors and say, "You don't have to sign up to be a full-fledged member of Liberty in order to participate." It has been a roadblock for open-source developers.

Q: You recently became president of Liberty. What's on the top of your agenda?
If I could leave 2007 by changing the perception of folks who have known about Liberty from, "Oh Liberty, they're still around?" to "Yes, they're doing good stuff, they're driving conversation in this space," then I am very proud. 

More Newsmakers

Previous page
Page 1 | 2

See more CNET content tagged:
Liberty Alliance, Microsoft Passport, enterprise, confusion, folk

15 comments

Join the conversation!
Add your comment (Log in or register)
This will fail...
for exactly the same reason that Passport failed. Even if it can be done securely (which I doubt), users DO NOT WANT identity information to be shared across sites or among organizations. If online businesses try to force users to use this, they will lose business.
Posted by mh20932 (41 comments )
Reply Link Flag
you don't get it
the whole notion of liberty alliance is to be privacy friendly. today's online environment requires the sharing of way too much information with way too many people. liberty's approach is to minimize those issues and put control back in the end users' hands. doesn't that address your concern?
Posted by privacychick (3 comments )
Link Flag
I agree, nobody wants this
Except maybe American Express and eBay and big companies like that.
Posted by lcromwell34289 (12 comments )
Link Flag
this will not fail if...
people recognize there are alternatives to the way idenityt and personal info is handled today. When people and businesses recognize that liberty alliance and federated id methods in general let individuals take at least some level of control back of their identity, and also demand it then it and the principals it is based on should succeed.
Posted by idbabe (7 comments )
Reply Link Flag
Open actions are good actions
Liberty is making effort to be inclusive and reach out the the community to make the best forward progress in this space. Saying 'this will fail' is burying one's head in the sand. The OpenLiberty (<a class="jive-link-external" href="http://www.openliberty.org/" target="_newWindow">http://www.openliberty.org/</a>) announcement is evidence of that effort and we should all be sharing think space to push forward rather than trying to tear good efforts down.

get together people!
Posted by Identi-girl (1 comment )
Reply Link Flag
The problem is...
...that this is not something that web users are asking for. It's something that's being pushed by commercial interests. Why do you think that Passport failed? Because the technology wasn't good enough, because people don't trust Microsoft, or because people fundamentally do not want an organization managing their online profile?
Posted by mh20932 (41 comments )
Link Flag
 

Join the conversation

Add your comment

The posting of advertisements, profanity, or personal attacks is prohibited. Click here to review our Terms of Use.

ie8 fix

RSS Feeds

Add headlines from CNET News to your homepage or feedreader.

Markets

Market news, charts, SEC filings, and more

Related quotes

Oracle Corporation (0.08%) 0.02 26.14
Dow Jones Industrials (-0.60%) -74.92 12,454.83
S&P 500 (-0.22%) -2.86 1,317.82
NASDAQ (-0.07%) -1.85 2,837.53
CNET TECH (-0.20%) -4.05 2,040.30
  Symbol Lookup
ie8 fix
  • Recently Viewed Products
  • My Lists
  • My Software Updates
  • Promo
  • Log In | Join CNET