OpenID Development Moves Along; Fear Of Universal Access Still Palpable

The modern invention known as OpenID, first developed by a Mr Brad Fitzpatrick (creator of LiveJournal), offers quite an enticing prospect. In essence, its purpose is to simplify greatly the maintenance of multiple Web service/utility accounts, by providing a single name and single password, both (ideally) secure, in order that the user’s experience when interacting with said accounts be as seamless and fluid as possible. No documents full of passcodes to maintain. No need to entrust sensitive data to various software makers. Just one item to consider: OpenID.

But a great number of naysayers think such a future of universal access for Web users is fraught with ifs, ands, and buts to consider. They attest to the fact that we do not live in world very much hospitable to such an effort, and that if and when compromised, the negative consequences could grow to be exponentially more disastrous than those Average Jack and Jane have to contend with today.

And I for one fall in line with the skeptics. I don’t want to. Mind you, I would like very much to believe in an OpenID-like solution. After all, it’s received quite a bit of attention from a number of big businesses in the tech industry, including AOL and Microsoft. And with Google’s OpenSocial system getting a good deal of recognition at present, OpenID as a result looks rather plausible, no? One could perhaps imagine the two would go hand-in-hand in one way or another.

However, it is in everyone’s best interest to appreciate and accept the truth that malicious folk with malicious instruments do exist, and would very much like to glean quite a bit more information from the systems and accounts they continue to pillage to this day.

At this very moment, an all-encompassing raid of one’s personal identification is almost impossible. Granted, the level of difficulty for accomplishing such a feat is directly proportional to the effort made by the victim – or potential victim, as it were - to keep aspects of one’s identity under uncommon sets of locks and keys. But barring any moronic, laissez-faire handling of personal information by either the individual or the companies he/she interacts with, at least some measure of safety is ensured.

Whether that thorough a guarantee can be given in a setting involving widespread use of the OpenID system is still not entirely clear. What’s more, there’s something to be said for the fear to allow one service, one utility, one thing the ability to “control” so much. Hence the freakish chatter about corporate monopolies, the data farms they possess, and the expansion of governmental powers over their respective citizenries.

Not to say that conspiracies are in play. More of than not, those are born of intelligent yet fantastical analyses. But all in all, I imagine we’ve got quite a long way to go before OpenID is seriously considered as a trustworthy replacement for the growing keychains we fumble around with in our increasingly digital lives.

Nonetheless, here’s to hoping we one day can give OpenID a good run, eh?