OpenID 2.0: a platform for user-centric identity management
Abstract
With the advancement in user-centric and URI-based identity systems over the past two years, it has become clear that a single specification will not be the solution to all problems. Rather, like the other layers of the Internet, developing small, interoperable specifications that are independently implementable and useful will ultimately lead to market adoption of these technologies. This is the intent of the OpenID framework. OpenID Authentication 1.0 began as a lightweight HTTP-based URL authentication protocol. OpenID Authentication 2.0 it is now turning into an open community-driven platform that allows and encourages innovation. It supports both URLs and XRIs as user identifiers, uses Yadis XRDS documents for identity service discovery, adds stronger security, and supports both public and private identifiers. With continuing convergence under this broad umbrella, the OpenID framework is emerging as a viable solution for Internet-scale user-centric identity infrastructure.
Integrity signals
Registry
Cites
Statistics
Claims the paper makes
Claims other papers make about this one
Each is checked against this paper’s own text: does it say what the citing paper says it does?
Smart contracts can be run in a trusted execution environment such as Intel SGX.
“smart contracts can be run in trusted execution environment such as Intel SGX [86]”
From Privacy-Preserving Solutions for Blockchain: Review and Challenges (2019) · cites this paper as [86]
Cited by
Sorted by citations
Privacy-Preserving Solutions for Blockchain: Review and Challenges
Bernal Bernabe, J., Canovas, J. L., Hernandez-Ramos, J. L., Torres Moreno, R., & Skarmeta, A. (2019) · IEEE Access · doi:10.1109/access.2019.2950872 · Cited by 430 · see citing works
“Several technologies, such as OpenId [48], SAML [49] or Fido [50], can be used as a baseline for implementing this user-centric approach, empowering users to share its identity across different services.”
MethodStockburger, L., Kokosioulis, G., Mukkamala, A., Mukkamala, R. R., & Avital, M. (2021) · Blockchain: Research and Applications · doi:10.1016/j.bcra.2021.100014 · Cited by 172 · see citing works
Vision: A Critique of Immunity Passports and W3C Decentralized Identifiers
Halpin, H. (2020) · Lecture Notes in Computer Science · doi:10.1007/978-3-030-64357-7_7 · Cited by 31 · see citing works
A Comparative Survey on Blockchain Based Self Sovereign Identity System
Kaneriya, J., & Patel, H. (2020) · 2020 3rd International Conference on Intelligent Sustainable Systems (ICISS) · doi:10.1109/iciss49785.2020.9315899 · Cited by 31 · see citing works
Smart Phone Anti-counterfeiting System Using a Decentralized Identity Management Framework
Omar, A. S., & Basir, O. (2019) · 2019 IEEE Canadian Conference of Electrical and Computer Engineering (CCECE) · doi:10.1109/ccece.2019.8861955 · Cited by 15 · see citing works
The OLYMPUS Architecture—Oblivious Identity Management for Private User-Friendly Services
Torres Moreno, R., Bernal Bernabe, J., García Rodríguez, J., Kasper Frederiksen, T., Stausholm, M., Martínez, N., Sakkopoulos, E., Ponte, N., & Skarmeta, A. (2020) · Sensors · doi:10.3390/s20030945 · Cited by 15 · see citing works
- Authors
- Recordon, D., & Reed, D.
- Affiliations
- Verisign (United States) (US)
- Cordance Corporation, Sammamish WA
- Venue
- Proceedings of the second ACM workshop on Digital identity management
- Publisher
- ACM
- Published
- 2006-11-03
- Pages
- 11-16
- OpenAlex
- W2054702684
- Cited by
- 467
- References
- 0
- Citations by year
- 2026: 3 · 2025: 17 · 2024: 12 · 2023: 10 · 2022: 11 · 2021: 17 · 2020: 17 · 2019: 13 · 2018: 25 · 2017: 24 · 2016: 23 · 2015: 23 · 2014: 46 · 2013: 48 · 2012: 53
- FWCI
- 10.75
- Type
- conference paper
- Language
- en
- Open access
- closed
- Topics
- Physical Sciences › Computer Science › Information Systems › User Authentication and Security Systems
- Physical Sciences › Computer Science › Computer Networks and Communications › Advanced Authentication Protocols Security
- Social Sciences › Sociology and Political Science › Access Control and Trust
- Keywords
- authentication protocols, interoperability
About these checks
Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.
Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.
Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.
What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›
Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review