Beta
×

Welcome to the Slashdot Beta site -- learn more here. Use the link in the footer or click here to return to the Classic version of Slashdot.

Thank you!

Before you choose to head back to the Classic look of the site, we'd appreciate it if you share your thoughts on the Beta; your feedback is what drives our ongoing development.

Beta is different and we value you taking the time to try it out. Please take a look at the changes we've made in Beta and  learn more about it. Thanks for reading, and for making the site better!

Microsoft Defends Passport To Privacy Group

timothy posted more than 12 years ago | from the just-look-at-that-shine dept.

Privacy 250

securitas writes: "CNET reports that Microsoft is defending Passport as safe and secure in a presentation to the Center for Democracy and Technology. Other organizations such as the Electronic Privacy Information Center, Junkbusters and even the U.S. government may be lobbied by MS this week to fend off a Federal Trade Commission complaint filed by 15 consumer and privacy groups that charges unfair and deceptive practices."

cancel ×

250 comments

Sorry! There are no comments related to the filter you selected.

Your balls online. (-1, Offtopic)

Anonymous Coward | more than 12 years ago | (#2247133)

Click here [comp-u-goat.net] to see your balls.

Well... (2, Funny)

Heph_Smith (513724) | more than 12 years ago | (#2247137)

Well I feel safer....

Unfair Practices? (2, Funny)

Papa Legba (192550) | more than 12 years ago | (#2247139)

Microsoft accused of unfair practices and deceptive techniques!?! I must say that I am shocked, schocked I tell you!

Unfortunatly I am uneligable for any such legal action against them as I think I gave them my soul in the last click thruogh agreement I did...

Re:Unfair Practices? (1)

LWolenczak (10527) | more than 12 years ago | (#2247428)

Yeah... I think there was something about how our soul was property of microsoft..... plus all the documents we create, modify, and possibly view....

Anyway... I think sold my soul to them... well I did not, I still love linux/unix, but the company I used to work for paid for my MCSE cert.... *screams of horror*

Anyway..... Aslong as we don't read the EULA.... we have a slight legal foot to stand on.... (BTW, just so you know Microsoft, NOBODY reads your EULAs!)

It is safe! (-1, Offtopic)

Anonymous Coward | more than 12 years ago | (#2247145)

It is safe! But those damn crackers make it unsafe!

Eh.

Re:It is safe! (-1, Offtopic)

Anonymous Coward | more than 12 years ago | (#2247184)

Bahaha... Thank you, kind AC.

One password, multiple accounts, low security (4, Informative)

Ghoser777 (113623) | more than 12 years ago | (#2247149)

This says it all:

"One of Passport's greatest security weaknesses may be the single sign-on process, analysts said. The single point of entry could also be a single point of failure. Since the ID is always an e-mail address, someone looking to break into an account might easily obtain half the information needed to do so."

Because people usually don't pick very secure passwords, it's better to have multiple passwords so that an evesdropper or other malicious person can't crack into all yur accounts. U of I just made people intentionally set all their 3 or 4 passwords instead of just giving them one the applied to all 4 (although most people tend to choose the same password for all their online services anyway)

Also, because Passport's trying to incorporate a lot of information in one place that used to be distrubuted in many different places, if some one hacks into Passport, there goes all your privacy.

F-bacher

Re:One password, multiple accounts, low security (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 12 years ago | (#2247190)

Get real. The reason people use such weak passwords is that they need different accounts for each of 100s of web sites. If you could just have one and it was easier to remember, it would be much easier to actually have a good one and change it often.

Idiot (-1, Flamebait)

Anonymous Coward | more than 12 years ago | (#2247205)

If you could just have one and it was easier to remember, it would be much easier to actually have a good one and change it often.

Which is exactly why Passport is going to be very insecure, and many people will get their info stolen.

Re:One password, multiple accounts, low security (3, Interesting)

vsync64 (155958) | more than 12 years ago | (#2247278)

Keyring for PalmOS [sourceforge.net] . This thing is perfect. Set up an account, generate a new random password. Then I look up the password the first few times I need to access the account (it helps that my Visor is always either on the desk or clipped to my belt). After that, it's burned into my brain.

The funny thing is, I don't know if it uses some kind of mnemonic algorithm like VMS's password generator does, but I find the generated passwords to be very rhythmic and easy to remember. I'd give an example of my favorite, but then I'd have to change my credit card password :P. Of course, it may just be something peculiar about how my mind works; I've always found it very easy to remember arbitrary number sequences when they are used frequently in my daily life (phone numbers, IBM PC color codes, &c)

Re:One password, multiple accounts, low security (5, Insightful)

sfe_software (220870) | more than 12 years ago | (#2247221)

If I'm not mistaken, it's worse than that.

Scenerio 1: User always uses the same login/password everywhere they go.

If you obtained that username and password, you'd be able to log into any service *that you know they use*. You would not be able to log into any random service unless that user happened to have been there before.

Scenerio 2: Passport.

If you obtain their Passport login and password, you could log into services *the user has never logged into before*. I'll admit I don't know much about how Passport works, but it seems that you'd be able to use their credit cards and other personal information at any Passport-enabled site...

So even though users may choose non-secure passwords and use the same info at many sites, you still would have to know what services the user has signed up with. Passport eliminates that obstacle.

Re:One password, multiple accounts, low security (3, Insightful)

Kierthos (225954) | more than 12 years ago | (#2247250)

And of course, when it does get hacked (I'm sorry, we're talking about M$ here, someone will hack it just because of that) and J. Random User ends up with thousands of $ worth of porn site use, or eBay charges, or whatever, what will be the reaction from M$?

A service pack? Abject denial?

It's simple... if you're providing an online service, you need to supply the best protection possible to your clients. And there is no indication that M$ has the slightest clue on how to do this.

Kierthos

Sad News... (-1, Troll)

Anonymous Coward | more than 12 years ago | (#2247151)

I just heard some sad news on TV, apparently Slashdot website creator, Rob "CmdrTaco" Malda, was rushed to the hospital this afternoon after having his penis sliced off. Authorities say the accident involved Rob's penis, his computer, and an illegal computer device imported from China that was designed to stimulate the penis during cyber-sex. The authorities aren't releasing many details yet as to how it happened, but they suspect that the device malfunctioned which caused his penis to be sliced off. However, there is speculation among the Slashdot community that the Open Source Operating System "Linux" is to blame, for its faulty structure and lack of professional development. There is no word of whether there was any foul-play involved from hackers amongst the Linux community.

Stop using "Linux" goddamnit (-1, Offtopic)

Anonymous Coward | more than 12 years ago | (#2247154)

It's real name is Freax, not Linux and definately not GNU/Linux !

-- Linus

Passport - Great idea, iffy implementation. (1)

Tyler Eaves (344284) | more than 12 years ago | (#2247159)

A web-wide identification service would literally be the best thing to happen to the web. Think about it. When you visit a new site, it will simply prompt you for your desired username, and then gets your info from some central source. Imagine not having to remember passwords for a million sites. The key here though is that the central source must be a trustworthy one. Microsoft does NOT fit that criteria. Personally, I think the ideal administrative body would be Verisign, or somebody like that. Someone already in the online security business, or racket if you prefer.

Re:Passport - Great idea, iffy implementation. (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 12 years ago | (#2247179)

> Imagine not having to remember passwords for a million sites.

Imagine all the people,
using Mozilla PSM...
ooh ooh ooo ooh...

Re:Passport - Great idea, iffy implementation. (1)

Tyler Eaves (344284) | more than 12 years ago | (#2247183)

Yes, but what happens when you aren't on your home box?

Re:Passport - Great idea, iffy implementation. (1)

Kierthos (225954) | more than 12 years ago | (#2247399)

Well, either you set up Passport on every single machine you use/have access to, which probably isn't the brightest idea in the world, or you "suffer" through having to fill in the data/passwords/whatever like the rest of us.

Personally, I'm not planning on using Password at all. But then, I still use Windows 95 on my machine at home.

Kierthos

Old idea (1)

Anonymous Coward | more than 12 years ago | (#2247182)

NIS, NIS+ Kerberos, others.


And if the single source happens to run an insecure operating system from Microsoft, then there will be disaster.


Microsoft fell to Code Red like everyone else who ran a Microsoft operating system. Far too much responsibility for Microsoft to handle. ANd that doesn't even factor in the matter of whether or not they can be trusted to act ethically.

Re:Passport - Great idea, iffy implementation. (1)

exceed (518714) | more than 12 years ago | (#2247188)

That isn't the greatest idea. What if your password was leaked/someone figured it out? Then would they automatically have access to your account on millions of websites? That doesn't sound like good security to me. (No pun intended ;x)

Re:Passport - Great idea, iffy implementation. (3, Funny)

demaria (122790) | more than 12 years ago | (#2247191)

Yep Verisign.

Because web certificate authentication is so wonderful as it is today. :-)

Re:Passport - Great idea, iffy implementation. (2)

dragons_flight (515217) | more than 12 years ago | (#2247213)

It's not just the central source that needs to be trustworthy. Everyone that gets permission to access that info from the source needs to trustworthy too.

In a perfect world businesses would never sell information about their customers, but we all know it happens occasionally. What if a supposedly legitimate business with access to Passport decides they can make good bucks selling user information to a 3rd party that can't get it legitimately? Not to mention the fact that Passport may give this rude business more info about me than I would normally need to give them during the course of doing business with them.

The fact that businesses, for the most part, only have information that they need about their own clients is a level of security in itself.

Does anyone know more about how MS plans to allow 3rd parties access to Passport authentication?

Hmm.. (1)

exceed (518714) | more than 12 years ago | (#2247163)

I don't know about many other people, but I don't think too many people would have an e-mail account on a service such as Passport if it was going to contain highly sensitive material. I use services like this as "spam e-mails" so that I can sign up for things that require an e-mail address (but some websites won't even let you sign up with an e-mail like Passport or Hotmail, anyways).

Re:Hmm.. (3, Insightful)

kilgore_47 (262118) | more than 12 years ago | (#2247216)

I don't know about many other people, but I don't think too many people would have an e-mail account on a service such as Passport if it was going to contain highly sensitive material. I use services like this as "spam e-mails" so that I can sign up for things that require an e-mail address (but some websites won't even let you sign up with an e-mail like Passport or Hotmail, anyways).

Sure, my current passport account is filled with bogus info and is mostly used for hotmail and sometimes msn communities. But the idea is that the passport login will be required for more legit/official uses such as the MSN HomeAdvisor, financial sites, and maybe even ecommerce. Sites that you'd ordinarily give real info to will soon be using passport. And that sucks.

security and privacy a difficult issue (5, Insightful)

Proud Geek (260376) | more than 12 years ago | (#2247164)

Passport is definitely an easier solution for consumers than any alternative yet presented. Having all your information stored in one central location is definitely better than having all your information stored all over the place. Microsoft also has a lot more motivation and resources to protect it than Joe Random Vendor.

The problem is that they haven't had any success protecting it anyway. To be completely fair, neither has anyone else. The other difficulty is that although I would trust MS rather than JRV to protect my data, the necessity of distribution and interaction opens up a whole new class of security holes that no one has even thought of before.

The unfortunate truth is that right now the only way to protect your privacy online is not to give out any information, and that Passport will do exactly nothing to remedy this situation.

Re:security and privacy a difficult issue (3, Insightful)

kilgore_47 (262118) | more than 12 years ago | (#2247186)

Having all your information stored in one central location is definitely better than having all your information stored all over the place.

I disagree.
Just because I am truthfull when entering my age on one site doesn't mean I want to be on another site. If both ask for my age, and both use passport, I'd have to use two passport accounts to achive my age-deception! And that defeats the whole purpose.

Age is just a trivial example. What info (and how much info) most people give out varies greatly between sites. How does it benefit me, the end user, to have all my info in one place? I can remember passwords, so that one-password argument is no good.

And, even if I wanted one place for all my info, M$ would be the last company I would want to administer it.

Re:security and privacy a difficult issue (5, Informative)

jonnosan (300963) | more than 12 years ago | (#2247201)

If you have a look at the passport SDK, you'll see that the affiliated sites don't have direct access to any of the user's data.

A site that wants to use Passport for SSO generates an URL that redirects to the passport website. Then the user logs in, and passport redirects back to the original site. The original site can then access the authenticated username, but that's it.

When the site wants to get some data from the user, say the user's age or address, they don't query passport directly. What they do is redirect back to passport, passport generates a form with the values prefilled in. Then the user can edit those values, or just click submit, and the values are posted back to the original site.

So as a user you still get full control over what data a site you visit has. And you can tell a particular site info that is different to what is stored in passport. But it does save you typing in the same old boring gumpf into site after site.

Re:security and privacy a difficult issue (3, Informative)

howardjeremy (241291) | more than 12 years ago | (#2247241)

When the site wants to get some data from the user, say the user's age or address, they don't query passport directly. What they do is redirect back to passport, passport generates a form with the values prefilled in. Then the user can edit those values, or just click submit, and the values are posted back to the original site.

Or you can just use the very cool (and free) RoboForm [roboform.com] which sits in your toolbar and auto-fills forms that pop up in your browser (there are other form-fillers around but I haven't tried them).

This kind of software doesn't require you to submit your personal information to a centralised authority (it's stored on your PC), and you can keep multiple 'identities' and choose which to use to fill in a form. I keep 'complete', 'partial', and 'anonymous' identities which I use to decide how much (and how truthful) information I want to give to a site.

Re:security and privacy a difficult issue (2, Informative)

dragons_flight (515217) | more than 12 years ago | (#2247334)

This report [avirubin.com] provides a decent description of Passport's technical architecture and some of it's potential issues, and links to other referances.

While it does confirm your statement that you can tailor and select what information you send from the "wallet" MS keeps for you, there are still problems. For one thing when you sign into Passport this is noted by use of encrypted (3 DES) cookies stored on your browser. The intent here is that you only need sign in once and all kinds of sites will be able to authenticate you. This part of the procedure happens transparently once you've signed into Passport.

The vulnerability here should be obvious, if you don't at some point logout from Passport, then the next person who opens the browser will be recognized as you anywhere that uses Passport authentication. Furthermore those neatly prefilled out forms will then contain all your information which this imposter could simply read off. Of course, the cookies are set to expire after a while, but certainly that is a matter of hours if not days, since MS doesn't want to interrupt people and force them to relogin.

This is only one of a number of problems and potential attacks outlined in the site I linked above. Good stuff, I suggest you check it out.

So now on, forgetting to logout will be an internet wide catastrophe as opposed to a localized problem? Thank you, MS.

Nope (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 12 years ago | (#2247211)

It's only real function is try to define a standard that people will have to rely on Microsoft for.

Your comment violated the postersubj compression filter. Comment aborted.

Hold on there cowboy, you just posted x seconds ago!

Ok, this filtering business is started to seem a little anal.

Re:security and privacy a difficult issue (2, Interesting)

Magila (138485) | more than 12 years ago | (#2247224)

The problem with placing all your information in one place is that it provides a very lucrative target for script kiddies and the like. How much effort is someone going to put into cracking JRV's user DB as opposed to MS Passport? The presence of such a high profile single point of failure is going to attract crackers like moths to a lamp.

Aggregation is a bigger concern (5, Interesting)

coyote-san (38515) | more than 12 years ago | (#2247255)

Information leaking from one site is annoying, esp. if it's something like a credit card number, but it's nothing compared to aggregated information being leaked.

As a silly example, let's say you buy rat poison. No big thing, people buy it all the time.

Let's say you buy a book about "perfect murders... and how they were caught." No big deal, people buy true crime books all the time.

Now let's say you recently bought a bunch of lingerie. And had it delivered. But not to your home address. You're having an affair, sleazy, but not unheard of.

Now finally let's toss in the fact that you just consulted a lawyer. A divorce lawyer. One who specializes in breaking prenuptial agreements.

Suddenly things are much more interesting.

Most of us aren't planning to murder our spouse, or even to look like we're thinking about it. But it's certainly possible for mindless data aggregation to cause people to jump to the wrong conclusion. E.g., you bought a couple books on alcoholism, and a few cases of wine? You obviously have a problem, don't you. (Nope, the wnie is a gift to newlyweds and the book is to help me understand if my nephew needs help.) Etc and so forth.

Even with all of this information centralized with Microsoft (and make no mistake that the Passport/Hailstorm system will not collect this information), my biggest concern isn't that it will be leaked. My concern is that it will have bogus information feed into it. There's a nice market opportunity for nasty companies to put bad information into these records, then offer to clean it up for you. For a modest price, of course. All of the potential damage of a credit report, but with none of the legal safeguards.

Of course, that same problem exists today with the aggregated data provided by from credit card companies, but again it isn't a *single* point of failure. Even if you crack Citibank (still the largest CC issuer?), it does nothing about the hundreds of millions of people who don't have Citibank cards. But crack Hailstorm and you'll have information on almost everyone online.

Passport does NOT aggregate transactional data (1)

jonnosan (300963) | more than 12 years ago | (#2247280)

Passport doesn't collect transactions from affiliated sites.

There is no way that MS will know that you bought Rat Poison from one passport using site, and Lingerie from another.

Well, let me rephrase that. There are plenty of ways that that kind of information can be collected (i.e. through doubleclick and similar user-info-swapping deals) but Passport doesn't alter the equation.

There is a common misunderstanding here, passport is not the sole repository of all data for all sites who want to use passport. Each site collects and maintains it's own info.

Re:Passport does NOT aggregate transactional data (2, Interesting)

jonnosan (300963) | more than 12 years ago | (#2247307)

Actually I changed my mind - Passport does change things slightly.

The problem with aggregagating user transactions across multiple sites is matching up user accounts on one site with user accounts on another. DoubleClick solved this by using cookies, but (at least on single user Win9x boxen) identify a machine only, not a user, i.e. they can't detect multiple users of one machine or someone who uses lots of machines.

What passport does is make people use the same account ID at all sites (i.e. their email address).

Passport sites aren't the only sites that do this, e.g. safari.oreilly.com uses your email address as the login, as does amazon. So if Oreilly and Amazon wanted to match up the userbase to see what other books safari users purchased, they could quite easily. It would be a bit harder for Oreilly and SlashDot to match users however, since the login on slashdot is NOT your email address. But slashdot, like most sites, does still collect an email so matching would still be possible.

They way passport changes things a little is that people with multiple emails are more likely to use the same address on all sites, and less likely to give bodgey email addresses. So matching will be (a little bit) more reliable.

Re:security and privacy a difficult issue (2, Interesting)

kilgore_47 (262118) | more than 12 years ago | (#2247260)

To be completely fair, neither has anyone else.

I already replied to your post, but I forgot to address the above sentence.
Yahoo has already done it! A "Yahoo ID" can be used in as many places as a M$ passport, if not more.

For instance, if you setup a "Yahoo Wallet" with your yahoo id, that info (name, creditcard, and billing info) can be used on any of the thousands of independent e-stores that run their backend through store.yahoo.com. The same login/pass also works on any of the yahoo sites (stocks, chat, mail, myYahoo portal, travel, the list goes on).

I still don't think this is a good idea, but I'd rather give my info to Yahoo than M$. And no, I'm not just saying that because I hate bill gates; I've dealt with Yahoo Inc quite a bit (namely from running one of said store sites) and rather like the company.

argh (-1, Offtopic)

Anonymous Coward | more than 12 years ago | (#2247165)

those fags should burn in hell.

Maryland... (1, Redundant)

kilgore_47 (262118) | more than 12 years ago | (#2247177)

They probably won't lobby any state reps from maryland!

(for those who don't know - the passport eula says you can't use it in the state of maryland.)

Re:Maryland... (1)

Kierthos (225954) | more than 12 years ago | (#2247258)

Hmmm... didn't know that. And the reason for this is? (I might have to move to Maryland...)

Kierthos

Re:Maryland... (2, Interesting)

kilgore_47 (262118) | more than 12 years ago | (#2247282)

The reasons are complicated, and IANAL.

Its explained here [newsforge.com] to some extent. That story claims its because Maryland has a law (that microsoft helped to pass) which is incompatible with the passport legal B.S.

Re:Maryland... (1)

ethereal (13958) | more than 12 years ago | (#2247298)

So does Microsoft really attempt to do location verification, though? We all know how well users respect EULAs, after all :) Sounds like more of a CYA solution to me.

Selective paranoids (4, Insightful)

frleong (241095) | more than 12 years ago | (#2247185)

So these privacy groups get worried about Microsoft's Passport leaking information when the biggest leaks of personal info are from fallen dotcoms and stupid e-commerce web sites? People, when you are paranoid, at least be paranoid to everybody, not just to Microsoft.

Re:Selective paranoids (5, Insightful)

kilgore_47 (262118) | more than 12 years ago | (#2247210)

So these privacy groups get worried about Microsoft's Passport leaking information when the biggest leaks of personal info are from fallen dotcoms and stupid e-commerce web sites? People, when you are paranoid, at least be paranoid to everybody, not just to Microsoft.

"fallen" dotcoms are, by definition, no longer in bussiness. Complaining about them won't do any good. Microsoft, on the other hand, is very much in bussiness. Their passport service has a bad track record. There is no indication that microsoft has made any major changes in response to the barrage of criticism it has received. It's growing, and in the future you will undoubtedly see more sites where a passport login is required for certain features. That is why its important to be paranoid about this threat now.

Re:Selective paranoids (1)

frleong (241095) | more than 12 years ago | (#2247223)

"fallen" dotcoms are, by definition, no longer in bussiness. Complaining about them won't do any good.

Although the companies may be out of business, their founders and owners are not yet dead. You can always sue them if they leak your personal info when they sell the dotcom assets.

Their passport service has a bad track record.

What kind of bad track record? Has it leaked any private info? You have to separate the security problems of Hotmail (which is a Passport client) from the Passport service.

Re:Selective paranoids (2)

kilgore_47 (262118) | more than 12 years ago | (#2247267)

? You have to separate the security problems of Hotmail (which is a Passport client) from the Passport service.

I don't see it that way. If my hotmail password (passport password) is compromised due to hotmail's security issues, my passport account is essentially useless.

Re:Selective paranoids (2, Informative)

frleong (241095) | more than 12 years ago | (#2247275)

So far, I have not heard of any password being compromised due to Hotmail's security problems (you can only read mail, but the password is not revealed because of this).

Of course, hackers can still use the old password guessing trick or social-engineering techniques, but this is not Passport's problem, nor Hotmail's.

this is fucked up (-1)

ascii spork (518057) | more than 12 years ago | (#2247192)

Safety of our customers' accounts and account information is of paramount importance to Wachovia. We go to great lengths to protect the confidentiality and security of your account, which is why we have these requirements for your User ID and Password. You may use any combination of letters and numbers to create your User ID. In addition to letters and numbers, your Password may contain any symbol except goatse.cx (;). This combination of letters, numbers and symbols greatly increases the security of your account information.

https://myaccounts.wachovia.com/help/explain_passw ord2.html [wachovia.com] [goatse.cx]

ascii spork thinks this is funny:

Re:this is fucked up (-1)

egg troll (515396) | more than 12 years ago | (#2247228)

Eh, a good attempt but the brackets in the hyperlink underline kinda fucked it up. Good try though.

Re:this is fucked up (-1)

ascii spork (518057) | more than 12 years ago | (#2247236)

Never overestimate stupid people. :)

ascii spork

Re:this is fucked up (-1)

egg troll (515396) | more than 12 years ago | (#2247270)

Whatever happened to the rest of the sporks?

Re:this is fucked up (-1)

ascii spork (518057) | more than 12 years ago | (#2247329)

no clue, I just wanted to troll with ascii and the name "ascii spork" just seemed to fit.

I'll be trolling for all the dead homiez tomorrow in their memorial.

Yeah, but it gives MS total control... (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 12 years ago | (#2247193)

forget the safety/security issues - if passport
takes over like windows has it means MS will
control the gateway to ecommerce, forcing other
coding methods into the dirt, as well as
have all your private information for their
use and abuse...

Well, they *have* made concessions before (5, Informative)

alewando (854) | more than 12 years ago | (#2247195)

Just last month, Microsoft changed the service agreement [computerworld.com] for their passport system to require only an email address and password to sign up. Did Microsoft [adequacy.org] do this without any armtwisting? No. Did they do it, though? Yes.

Just keep the pressure on them up. They're going to go ahead with some sort of service no matter what, but the amount of opposition they face now will determine how many of these concessions will be made "voluntarily". That way, even if the FTC doesn't come down with a favorable ruling, we won't be completely left out in the cold.

Incidentally, msnbc also has some coverage [msnbc.com] . A disinterested and impartial news source if there ever were one... or not, as it were.

Re:Well, they *have* made concessions before (1)

Lord Omlette (124579) | more than 12 years ago | (#2247385)

I have an idea for a fantastic slashcode mod. Just bear with me for a second: Anytime someone links to adequacy.org, automatically delete their account. What do you think?

Re:Well, they *have* made concessions before (0)

seann (307009) | more than 12 years ago | (#2247421)

I second that.

that ad*.org site is pretty "gay".

I don't care for it much, and I don't like how people think it's better than slashdot.

An Urgent Plea (-1, Offtopic)

In Search of O. P. P (519096) | more than 12 years ago | (#2247198)

After having seen a few of my recent posts [geocities.com] to this site, you might be forgiven for thinking that I harbour unfriendly feelings towards the sites administrators. Nothing could be further from the truth. I'm not a bad guy, really. I like these guys.

I want to help them.

I'm going to start today, and the best part about it is you can help me help them. Here's how:

The Get Timothy Lord Laid Appeal

Dear Reader,

I wish to bring to your attention an deplorable situation which cannot be allowed to continue. For too many years, Timothy Lord has been denied womanly affection. Of all the slashdot editors, I feel that he is the least undeserving of feminine attention, and yet, it seems that he suffers the most for the lack of it. His entry on the authors page [slashdot.org] is as follows:

" If you know (or are) a smart, cute, wonderful single woman who likes aloud reading and laughing, please let me know. Substantial Reward, references available, have own car."

I know we've all read his strangely formal plea, and felt in our souls the aching need he feels in his balls, but have any of us yet responded to this cry for help? I know there must be at least one smart, cute, single woman who reads this page. Unlike Timothy, many of us are blessed with the friendship of women who fit this description. And I know we'd all like to help out.

Timothy is currently the most prolific author of slashdot. He is the only editor who has not abandoned his commitment to the slashdot readers in order to implement lameness filters that don't work and moderate posts "for the good of the readers."

Timothy is slashdot's last honourable man.

Is it right to keep his dick on ice like this? No, I didn't think so. He's a sweet guy. Why are you torturing him? What's wrong with you? Don't you have a heart?!

Despite his sick dreams [monkey.org] about Mena Suvari [natalieportman.com] , I feel that Timothy is as perfect a gentleman you could hope to meet. If my instincts aren't recommendation enough, here's an artist's impression of what Tim would look like just after you put your keys on his forehead, prior to making him eat your ass. [angelfire.com] He cooks, too.

So how can you help?

  • Are you an attractive young woman or sufficiently effeminate man. who lives in or near Tennessee? Do you want to make your life mean something? Why not send Tim and email and offer to service him? Don't forget to let us know, so we can all thank and respect you.
  • Do you know a woman of such low moral fibre that she would willingly offer herself for sex to a man she's never met? Want to pimp her to Tim? Email Tim, and reply here, so we can give you props, jigga-man.
  • Do you have Timothy's email address? I don't. Help us out. I'm guessing timothy@slashdot.org probably works.
  • Got some advice for the unloved? Help a brother out. Post it here.
  • If all else fails: If we can't put Tim in a warm bed with a willing female, we can at least put him in a seedy motel bed with a disinterested but well-remunerated whore. Help Tim and contribute to the prostitution industry of Tennessee. Pledge your donation below.

Help in any way you can. Time is short. For all I know, Tim has never felt the love of a good woman. I'm pretty sure if you make it to 28 without getting laid at least once, your dick falls off in disgust. Plus, he's contemplating alternative lifestyles [slashdot.org] .

Your friend,

XXXXXXXXX XXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXX
XXX XXXX XX X
X X XX XXXX XXXXXXX
X XXX XXXXXXX XXXXXX
X XXX XX XX X
X XXX XX XXXXXXXXXXXX
X X XXX X X
XXX XXX XX XX
XXXXXXXXX XXXXX XXXXX

P.S. If this appeal meets with reasonable success, we'll be going ahead with some more ambitious projects. Look forward to seeing The Get CowboyNeal Blowed Appeal and The Get Michael Sims Iced Appeal.

Some unrelated notes: Why is there an indigo girls song on the censorware [censorware.org] page? Is Sims trying to tell us he's a lesbian?

I wanted to use these pictures of Nitrozac in this letter, but couldn't think of a good way to include them. Hopefully someone will find a use for them:

Re:An Urgent Plea (-1)

egg troll (515396) | more than 12 years ago | (#2247233)

Yeah but Jon Katz dresses up like a mighty fine woman and is enjoyed nightly by Timothy.

Re:An Urgent Plea (-1)

ascii spork (518057) | more than 12 years ago | (#2247256)

_
.-"""""""-. ,//,
/ FUCK | ;' ,/
| WHITEY / /\_/
\ .---.' / /
\ C' '>'| / /
'; - / / /
__)---;/` /
_.-' \`"""`| /
.' _/ \/
\ -;'| FUBU |
'-._/-. |
\(-\ |
|-------|
| J |
| | |
| ; |
| /| \
| _/ T /
| | | |
| | |__|_
|__| '-.__)
\__)

Shut You Mouth! Just Talking 'bout Lameness Filter (-1)

egg troll (515396) | more than 12 years ago | (#2247277)

,@@@@@@@@@, Gotta get me a
@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@ white woman!
@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@ /
@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@ /
@@@@@'_ _'@@@@@ /
@@@| o o |@@@
'@| (_) |@'
\ ___ /
|\_`~`_/|
____/: `"` :\____
/`}}}}}\ /{{{{{`\
/ {{{{{ \ / }}}}} \
/ }}}}} \.-./ {{{{{ \
| {{{{{ / | \ }}}}} |
Egg | }}}}} \/|\/ {{{{{ |
Troll | /{{{{{ '-' }}}}}\ |

Re:Shut You Mouth! Just Talking 'bout Lameness Fil (-1)

ascii spork (518057) | more than 12 years ago | (#2247319)


_.---._
.-' ((O)) '-.
\ _.\_/._ /
/..___..\ STAY AWAY FROM THE WHITE WOMEN OR
;-.___.-; I'LL CALL MY PALS FROM THE LAPD
(| e ) e |) .;.
\ /_ / ||||
_\__-__/_ (\|'-|
/` / \V/ \ `\ \ )/
/ \ Y / \ /=/
/ | \ | / {} \/ /
/ /| `|' |\ /
\ \| |. | \_/
\ /\ |. |
\_/\ |. |
/)_/ | |
// ',__.'.__,'
// | | |
// | | |
(/ | | |
| | |
| _ | _ |
| | |
| | |
| | |
|___|___|
/ J L \
(__/ \__)

ascii spork

Re:Shut You Mouth! Just Talking 'bout Lameness Fil (-1)

ascii spork (518057) | more than 12 years ago | (#2247325)

+
(_)
/ \
/_____\
|.;.|
\(%)/
\_/ $35 AND I DON'T CARE
o=={_}==o COLOR YOU ARE
| |
| | ,sSSSSs ~
| ,sSSS` "> ~~ ~
| SSSS@ =)~ ~
| SSSSS_(_ __~~
| |SS/ _)_) /.-
| |< \ /\//
| | \|==(\_/
| | (/ ;
| | |____|
| | \ |\
| | ) ) )
| | ( |/
| | /\ |
| /.(=\
Y\_\

ascii spork

Re:Shut You Mouth! Just Talking 'bout Lameness Fil (-1)

ascii spork (518057) | more than 12 years ago | (#2247349)

_.-".
.-" |
| |
|.--'"`\_| I WOULD RATHER FUCK A PUPPY
( '/ ' ) THAN HAVE SEX WITH A WHITE PERSON
\ - /
_`) (`_
/` '--' `\
/ _,,_ \
/ /` `\ \
/\_/ / 6 6\ \_/\
\ \/\ Y /\/ /
\ \/ `'U` \/ /
\( \ / )/
|\_/ \_/|
/ ____ \
\ ( || ) /
(__)||(__)
| || |
| || |
|__||__|
/ |/ |
/ // /
`""` `"`

ascii spork

Re:Shut You Mouth! Just Talking 'bout Lameness Fil (-1)

ascii spork (518057) | more than 12 years ago | (#2247354)

,;;;;;;;;;,
/////////\\\\
|// __ __ \\|
\/=(_o)^(o_)=\/ HI MR. BLACK MAN,
(_ (___) _) MY NAME IS TIMOTHY
\ \_____/ / AND I AM A PUPPY
`-._ _.-'
__.-)_(-,__
./' \_\_/_/ `\.
/ > | //\ | < \
/ \ | |/| | / \
/ |\ | |/| | /| \
/ /| \ | |/| | / |\ \
( ( | \| |/| |/ | ) )
\ \| Y |/| Y |/ /
\ | o| |/| |- | /
`\ | | `^` | | /'
`| o|=[Ll=|- |'
| / \ |
~~|` \ `|~~
| | |
| | |
| | |
| | |
| | |
| | |
| | |
| | |
|____|____|
/ / \ \
/ / \ \
`---' `---`

ascii spork

Re:Shut You Mouth! Just Talking 'bout Lameness Fil (-1)

ascii spork (518057) | more than 12 years ago | (#2247370)

_
(_)
.-|-. SO THE BLACK MAN AND TIMOTHY
/ | \__ LIVED HAPPILY EVER AFTER.
\ | '._
|\ '-._ ,_
| \ ,_'-/_`>
/ / ( __ )
/_ /_ / > \ >

ascii spork

Only trust those you can physically get to (3, Insightful)

Mandelbrute (308591) | more than 12 years ago | (#2247218)

If you are going to trust a business enough to allow it to have access to your finances, then it should be a business that you can physically reach, so that if something goes seriously wrong you can call the police in your own country or go bang on their door yourself without getting a visa. If nameless employee #6363666 gets up to a bit of embezzlement, and they are in another country, it's likely that you'll never see the money again and the offender will never get extridited.


"I'm calling at international rates from Outthebackofstan, I've been on hold for three hours, and why don't you ^%#$%#^ read your email?"
"Oh, I'm sorry, you have the wrong department, this is the Pacific USA only support line. Please dial this number again in another eleven hours and the people supporting your region will be here. Have a nice day" (To co-worker: "Another commie towelhead") click."

hi, I'm back. (-1)

ascii spork (518057) | more than 12 years ago | (#2247230)

___
.;___`'. YOU CAN'T SEE IT...
/_ _ \ | BUT MY DICK IS THIS BIG.
|a a \_/ _
| < _) _n/ |
__/\. \_--' /____.' \_/
\__/ '---/`\_/`\ .'
`'.___\_/`\_| .---'
\\ ' \ \
\\_'___\ \
.' _ \/
/ .' \ \
/ / \ \
| | | |
\____\ /____/
(__,_| |_,__)

ascii spork

Re:hi, I'm back. (-1, Offtopic)

Anonymous Coward | more than 12 years ago | (#2247269)

So based on my ruler and my screen resolution of 1024 X 768, your dick is ONLY 3 inches?

Re:hi, I'm back. (-1)

ascii spork (518057) | more than 12 years ago | (#2247317)

you're too kind!

my resolution is 1280x1024

ascii spork

Re:hi, I'm back. (-1, Offtopic)

Anonymous Coward | more than 12 years ago | (#2247409)

While, I can't say I go in for lots of dick jokes, I must say you've made troll land a much prettier place to visit.

I wouldn't want to live at -1 but on the occasions when I do come down here to look for AC's with half a brain, I'm much happier to see that the ascii spork has been here before me. Far classier than racist crap, false news, and MS flames.

I bow before the prowess that is the ascii spork. Keep up the good work.

some sites _refuse_ passport users... (3, Interesting)

bergeron76 (176351) | more than 12 years ago | (#2247231)

Like this one. [gridforge.com] They won't allow users to use Passport authentication to buy thier goods, and they posted info about why. What better way to prevent users from using MSPassport, than to send consumers mixed signals about being able to use it.

Re:some sites _refuse_ passport users... (1)

bergeron76 (176351) | more than 12 years ago | (#2247248)

you have to click on the info [gridforge.com] link. I should've mentioned that.

Disclaimer: I [bergeron.com] own the company.

Re:some sites _refuse_ passport users... (1)

oliphaunt (124016) | more than 12 years ago | (#2247252)

hmmm, now that's really interesting. So it would seem that maybe the indirect approach would work...

Instead of sending hate mail to MS, send emails to potential licensors of Passport authentication and suggest to them that they will be losing your business if they require the Passport login.

As long as you have a choice, that should be good enough. Let the suckers who want to give away their credit card info go ahead and use Passport- let everyone who knows better choose not to do so.

After the first couple of major cracks where CC #'s are lost, maybe people will see the error of MS's ways and look elsewhere.

Re:some sites _refuse_ passport users... (0)

Homewrecker (517770) | more than 12 years ago | (#2247348)

If you pull this trick without being large enough or offering something that is worth the extra headache of doing it your way, you will lose business by the truckload. I would certainly shop elsewhere.

oh god micro$oft sucks!! (-1, Troll)

xXgeneric nicknameXx (463142) | more than 12 years ago | (#2247232)

i mean...dammit, they suck don't they? jeez i hate that bill gates, dont you? windows is just crap...crap i tell you! linux kicks ass!

Passport EULA and Privacy Policy (4, Informative)

dragons_flight (515217) | more than 12 years ago | (#2247235)

For those that are interested here are links to the:

Passport EULA [passport.com]

Passport Privacy Policy [passport.com]

Re:Passport EULA and Privacy Policy (-1)

egg troll (515396) | more than 12 years ago | (#2247299)

Wow, spread your legs a little wider karma whore. I'm going to log back into my real account and mod this down into oblivian.

Re:Passport EULA and Privacy Policy (3)

dragons_flight (515217) | more than 12 years ago | (#2247343)

Wow, spread your legs a little wider karma whore. I'm going to log back into my real account and mod this down into oblivian.

You may not believe it, and I don't care, but I posted these after I went looking for them, BECAUSE I wanted to know what they said. It's pretty arrogant to sit here and argue about MS privacy and security issues in Passport, if you don't even know what information MS wants from people or how they intend to use it. I could have posted a summary, but I was too busy thinking about other things, and it didn't seem neccesary.

I'd hate to have that job. (5, Funny)

nougatmachine (445974) | more than 12 years ago | (#2247245)

Just imagine being the poor sap trying to defend Passport to privacy groups:

Privacy advocate: "So, you are trying to set yourself up as the one definitive source for our personal information online. Let's talk about your record: Hotmail backdoors, Code Red, Melissa, IIS, and Kournikova, among others, are horrible things which have been influenced by your poor implementations of products. And you want to have even more power?"

Microsoft PR guy: "Try to think of those as valuable lessons we have learned to make Passport more secure...

Re:I'd hate to have that job. (2, Funny)

dozing (111230) | more than 12 years ago | (#2247357)

Hotmail backdoors, Code Red, Melissa, IIS, and Kournikova, among others

I find it funny that you list bugs and virii and include IIS in that list. (Not that I disagree mind you. It just seemed interesting)

great idea, but not for /valuable/ passwords; ENUM (3, Insightful)

bcrowell (177657) | more than 12 years ago | (#2247251)

The whole thing is a great idea, but only for less valuable passwords. I'd love to have a service like Passport to keep track of all my passwords for mailing lists, etc. I'd even use it for online businesses that have my credit card info, since the credit card company cancels the charges in cases of fraud.

But no way would I use a single password for important stuff. And there's the problem: MS obviously wants to force you to use it for /everything/. So then you can have your whole identity stolen by the first criminal who watches over your shoulder while you type in your password.


It's also scary to ponder that next they'd probably force you to use it with ENUM [cconvergence.com] , a new scheme we're going to have shoved down our throats, which involves linking the DNS database to the database of phone numbers.

Privacy will be protected, or passport won't work (2, Insightful)

sevensharpnine (231974) | more than 12 years ago | (#2247254)

I'm not terribly worried by any "unfair and deceptive practices" that may ensue with regard to privacy. Any information given to Microsoft is done so in a completely voluntary manner: any leak of that information would certainly become well-known in a very short amount of time.

The success of the passport system, and quite possibly their .NET "architecture", relies in significant part on the confidentiality of any personal information stored. As the system aspires to collect an amount of personal info I've never seen one company (truthfully) attempt to aquire, I would expect consumers to be very wary. If any of this personal data should be stolen, the repercussions for their entire system could be enormous. In short, I think the market will sort this problem out. Though, given the track record of Microsoft, I certainly don't want to be a test subject while it does.

What's even more interesting, to me, is the fact Microsoft is using it's very large distribution channel to advertise and promote services in which it's competing against non-monopolistic companies. Messenger vs. ICQ (and others), Hotmail vs. many free email services, etc. I can't help but wonder if the FTC will look into this, rather than just the special interest groups concern.

great idea(l)s (4, Insightful)

seanw (45548) | more than 12 years ago | (#2247257)

this is such a classic microsoft-ism: thinking up a really good idea, and totally fucking up the implementation ([d]com, ole, activex, etc).

what I can't figure out is why this company, which is supposedly on the brink of launching this massive, multi-tiered platform that is .NET has shackled it to possibly the worst authentication possible.

I mean, come on, the username/password combo was maybe reasonable in the days when everyone had exactly one shell account. but today when everyone is expected to remember a user/pass combo for every one of a dozen or so websites they want to log into, the weakness of this paradigm has hit pretty hard. simply put: people can't remember them all, which means they either write them down lots of places (prett damn insecure) or use the same username/password for each account (even worse).

and MS has made THIS the lynchpin of their security model?

why couldn't MS use some of their much vaunted "monopoly power" to "leverage" an authentication system that actually matched the sophistication of the rest of .NET?

my suggestion: the medium which most people are accustomed to carrying that is intimately tied to their financial and personal data is the credit card. my MS "Passport" could be a physical smartcard that held authentication data, encryption keys...hell, anything. each copy of XP (and each bundled OEM copy) would include a small USB device that could read this card, maybe that was designed to mount onto the side of the monitor so it would stay out of the way.

YES this would be a major move, and it would stir things up a little. but when it is clearly called for, WHY NOT? people would just carry another little card in their wallet, the reader device would be small and dirt cheap (in that volume, most anything is) and in a year we would forget what we did without them. we have calling cards, and credit cards,and ATM cards...where is my computer card?

in any case, tying their much-heralded .NET platform to the username/password "security system" is about as intelligent as locking your car with duct tape, and will probably be about as effective.

Passport and XP (1)

notext (461158) | more than 12 years ago | (#2247261)

My favorite part of the article is the quote from the M$ exec stating that you don't have to sign up for passport to use xp.

If you have to sign up for it to use some parts of the os than yes, you do have to sign up for passport to use xp.

A 4 digit PIN ??? (1)

KhaliF (160350) | more than 12 years ago | (#2247262)

From this article it seems that some partner websites will require an additional 4 digit PIN in order to access services on that sites (such as banks etc)...

This is insane! If only *some* of the sites require the 4 digit PIN, and all the passwords and email addresses for the passport sites are the same (through passport itself), then what on earth is stopping someone who obtained your password (through brute force or whatever) from trying any site that requires a PIN as well with a simple 10,000 step PIN cracker??? Cracking a 4 digit PIN at internet speed is TRIVIAL!

Adding that 4 digit PIN is like adding a knot in the sticky tape holding your bicycle to the post.. It's just one more easily circumventable step in a flawed access-restriction service.

Micosoft has security awareness! (1)

jsse (254124) | more than 12 years ago | (#2247272)

One of Passport's greatest security weaknesses may be the single sign-on process,....Microsoft is addressing this by offering additional security features for partner Web sites, such as banks, asking for additional information or a four-digit PIN (personal identification number) as a second level of authentication.

Microsoft addressed this problem long time ago! People have been using MID(Message ID Number) [slashdot.org] for reading hotmail [hotmail.com] .

So stop questioning their security awareness.

I Don't See the Big Deal (1)

ShishCoBob (516335) | more than 12 years ago | (#2247274)

Ok MS has passport and would like it if you used it. They have Windows Messenger and MSN Explorer on XP.... Does that mean you have to use them... NO! There may be a few more things on XP that can use the passport... but again.. do you have to use them... NO!.. Unless you have to use them I don't think there is anything wrong.

Sad News... (-1, Offtopic)

Anonymous Coward | more than 12 years ago | (#2247289)

Aaliyah passed away this weekend in an airplane crash on the way back from filing her new video.

Re:Sad News... (-1, Offtopic)

Anonymous Coward | more than 12 years ago | (#2247324)

Actually that was last weekend. WTF?

Hemos Gets Married!! (-1)

egg troll (515396) | more than 12 years ago | (#2247292)

See the pics here! [geocities.com]


Your comment violated the postercomment compression filter. Comment aborted

Possible Compromise (1)

robbyjo (315601) | more than 12 years ago | (#2247300)

Probably US government make some compromise for the conflicting parties:

  1. Microsoft must be held liable for any information misuse and any leakage or possible exploit regarding on Passport. If any of such happens, Microsoft must pay proportional damage for each of its clients, both corporate and individual.
  2. Microsoft may not include indemnification clause on their Passport TOS.

These two things make Passport as unfair. You cannot do anything to Microsoft if someone cracked Passport and poked into your account, use your credit card, SMS your cell phone, etc. Probably the implication is worse for corporations: If someone cracked Passport, he/she can get their customer data, their trade secrets, and mocked them for their inability to put their utmost effort to protect customer's private data.

This must be stopped. I'm sure that a sheer amount of litigations would be tossed against Microsoft. Or probably went bankrupt just to recompensate their customer's punitive damage. :-)

Just a little PassPort note... (1, Interesting)

Anonymous Coward | more than 12 years ago | (#2247323)

On this computer, I have MSN Messenger installed (Win98), and the default setting start it at boot up. Now, in order to change the default settings, You have to sign on, which means you have to have a passport account. And deleting it isnt an option, as the owner of this computer uses it.

Localised or Centralised information (1, Informative)

Anonymous Coward | more than 12 years ago | (#2247335)

There's a fundamental dichotomy forming here as to how to handle personal information. It is being driven by the need/desire to be able to access your personal information wherever you are. Microsoft wants to centralise your information*, via Passport, .NET etc, so that all your data is all in one place that you can always access. That's nice, but worrying from a security point of view.

The alternative way of doing things is a distributed model. With PDAs becoming more widespread, and more powerful it won't be long before you can store most or all of your personal data/files on a single small portable device. Now, providing some decent interfaces are written, this offers the same ease of accessibility as Microsotfs centralised solution, with the benefit of increased security - YOU are responsible for YOUR OWN data.

I know which I prefer. I'll always trust my own abilities to secure my own data more than I trust Microsoft to secure it for me.

Roll on with the distributed model I say!

* By information/data I'm not just talking about street address, credit card number etc., I'm talking about all your work/code/data/etc.

Jedidiah

Single Point of Failer, but needed... (3, Insightful)

tshak (173364) | more than 12 years ago | (#2247338)

Passport, or a similar concept, is still needed. Customers want it. If a user has to have 10 different logins, they may:

1. Use the same password on all 10 anyway

2. Use grossly easy passwords so that they can remember them

3. A combo of 1 and 2.

With a Passport like concept, there's only one account to remember. Maybe then consumers will find it reasonable to memorize a secure password. Either way, a centralized system is needed for identification. As a web developer for 5+ years, customers don't want to fill out the same crap each time they visit a site, and if they could just type in their passport info to authorize access to certain private information, they'd do it. Now, it's up to us to come do the social and technological engineering to make this happen safely, and securely.

still need multi levels of authentication (2)

small_dick (127697) | more than 12 years ago | (#2247433)

as the article says, banks (and other partners) have the option of popping up their own authentication, to make sure Joe Blow is really who he says he is.

kinda blows the whole single point of authentication out of the picture.

What's the point? (1)

szomb (318129) | more than 12 years ago | (#2247355)

Can someone explain to me what possible advantages this silly, centralized, Microsoft-as-Big-Brother scheme has over keeping the information locally?

I mean, keep it in some nice standardized XML in encrypted form and require a passphrase for each decryption/use of the information.

Why would anyone in their right mind use this?

Re:What's the point? (-1, Offtopic)

Anonymous Coward | more than 12 years ago | (#2247374)

two words: nazi germany

Re:What's the point? (-1)

ascii spork (518057) | more than 12 years ago | (#2247395)

_-. _.._ _.-'`
.-; \ \-'` ` _..-'
_.-\_\-'`__...__..'
-' __.--'` /
_.'` \_ _/ WHERE DO YOU WANT TO COME TODAY?
| \
; \ .-'```'-.
\" \ / " " \
\" \| ".--.--. |
\_ ; / _ _ \ ;
| ( ( e _ e ) )
\ '-| T |-'_
\" \ = /" `\
\ '-...-' , " \
Y " " \ \
|" . " \ " \
| " _.-' " )
\ "/\._;' "_.;`
\ \_\.> ".''` |
| E " _.' " /---..
\ '--' " " `\
.-""-.> \ \" , " |
/ " " \ \ " | /
\ " \ "(_|_)--...-'| "/
'." \.-' / " .'
'-. " \ __.' .'
) `\ (_ "(
/ /\_) `\ \
(((_/ \_)))

ascii spork

Re:What's the point? (-1)

ascii spork (518057) | more than 12 years ago | (#2247402)

_..._
.' '.
/`\ /`\ |\
(__| |__)|\ \\ /|
( " ) \\ || // WE MASTURBATE A LOT ON MY PLANET
\ / \\||//
\ _ / |\|` /
'.___.' \____/
(___) (___)
/` `\ / /
| \/ /
| | |\ /
| | | "`
| | |
| | |
|_|_____|
(___)_____)
/ \ |
/ |\| |
//||\\ Y |
|| || \\ | |
|/ \\ |\|| |
\||__|__|
(___|___)
/ A \
/ / \ \
\___/ \___/

ascii spork

Re:What's the point? (-1)

ascii spork (518057) | more than 12 years ago | (#2247407)

:
'. _ .'
-= (~) =- E U R E K A
.' # '.

/"""""
| (')') WITH THIS HAND I CAN JERK MYSELF OFF
C _)
\ _|
\__/
<___Y>
/ \ :\\
/ | :|\
|___| :|/\
| | :|\ \
\ \ :| \ \_
\ \==L| \\\
///` ||
| ||
| ||
| ||
| ||
| ||
| ||
[___]]
(____))
^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^

ascii spork

Only email addresses are required (1)

MavEtJu (241979) | more than 12 years ago | (#2247412)

If all validation is done via email addresses (as userid), wouldn't that database make a great spam-list? I'm waiting for the moment that passportauthentication@mydomain.tld gets spam...

I will NEVER trust passport... (3, Informative)

Kazymyr (190114) | more than 12 years ago | (#2247414)

...unless they specifically address the bullying issues they have towards the consumer.

I used to have a Hotmail account, for several years (even before they were bought by MS). I was only logging in every 3-4 months, mostly to keep it active, because it wasn't my main email address.

One day I found in it a message informing me that I had been automatically issued a passport. Without my consent. They had just taken the info in my hotmail registration and created a passport for me, without asking my permission. I got very angry, and asked that the "passport" be removed, because I didn't want it. The reply was "it cannot be removed, once you got one, you're stuck with it forever". It seems that, by logging into my hotmail account after they had sent me the info, I had "automatically given them permission to activate the passport". But nowhere on the login page was there any information about this!

I eventually let the hotmail account expire, but AFAIK the passport account they crammed down my throat is still there. There is no option to delete it.
Load More Comments
Slashdot Login

Need an Account?

Forgot your password?

Submission Text Formatting Tips

We support a small subset of HTML, namely these tags:

  • b
  • i
  • p
  • br
  • a
  • ol
  • ul
  • li
  • dl
  • dt
  • dd
  • em
  • strong
  • tt
  • blockquote
  • div
  • quote
  • ecode

"ecode" can be used for code snippets, for example:

<ecode>    while(1) { do_something(); } </ecode>