<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?><rss version="2.0"
	xmlns:content="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/content/"
	xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/"
	xmlns:atom="http://www.w3.org/2005/Atom"
	>
<channel>
	<title>Comments for IdentityMeme.org</title>
	<atom:link href="http://identitymeme.org/comments/feed/" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml" />
	<link>http://identitymeme.org</link>
	<description>=JeffH's musings on identity, security, protocols, SDOs, and tussles thereof...</description>
	<pubDate>Fri, 18 May 2012 08:57:32 +0000</pubDate>
	<generator>http://wordpress.org/?v=2.6.5</generator>
		<item>
		<title>Comment on New rev of SIP-SAML profile by Hannes Tschofenig &#187; Blog Archive &#187; New rev of SIP-SAML profile</title>
		<link>http://identitymeme.org/archives/2008/11/04/new-rev-of-sip-saml-profile/#comment-18577</link>
		<dc:creator>Hannes Tschofenig &#187; Blog Archive &#187; New rev of SIP-SAML profile</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Fri, 07 Nov 2008 13:17:00 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://identitymeme.org/?p=67#comment-18577</guid>
		<description>[...] See http://identitymeme.org/archives/2008/11/04/new-rev-of-sip-saml-profile/ [...]</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>[...] See <a href="http://identitymeme.org/archives/2008/11/04/new-rev-of-sip-saml-profile/" rel="nofollow">http://identitymeme.org/archives/2008/11/04/new-rev-of-sip-saml-profile/</a> [...]</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>Comment on (Draft) Technical Comparison: OpenID and SAML by Speaking of Standards &#187; Blog Archive &#187; A Technical Comparison of OpenID and SAML</title>
		<link>http://identitymeme.org/archives/2007/12/17/draft-technical-comparison-openid-and-saml/#comment-12282</link>
		<dc:creator>Speaking of Standards &#187; Blog Archive &#187; A Technical Comparison of OpenID and SAML</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Fri, 08 Feb 2008 15:44:45 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://identitymeme.org/?p=58#comment-12282</guid>
		<description>[...] It&#8217;s great to see this kind of technical research now coming out in the field. The more we have of this kind of work the closer we will be to having solid and secure forms of online identity. If you are interested in reading the paper, it can be found here. [...]</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>[...] It&#8217;s great to see this kind of technical research now coming out in the field. The more we have of this kind of work the closer we will be to having solid and secure forms of online identity. If you are interested in reading the paper, it can be found here. [...]</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>Comment on Will &#8220;open internet&#8221; IDM Migrate Towards &#8220;trust circles&#8221; ? by Openid &#187; Will “open internet” IDM Migrate Towards “trust circles” ?</title>
		<link>http://identitymeme.org/archives/2008/01/21/will-open-internet-idm-migrate-towards-trust-circles/#comment-12275</link>
		<dc:creator>Openid &#187; Will “open internet” IDM Migrate Towards “trust circles” ?</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Tue, 22 Jan 2008 04:15:42 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://identitymeme.org/?p=62#comment-12275</guid>
		<description>[...] Web Analysis By Morad wrote an interesting post today on Will &#226;open internet&#226; IDM Migrate Towards &#226;trust circles&#226; ?Here&#8217;s a quick excerptBut I digress… Technorati Tags: deployment, openid, saml, Security, trust&#8230; [...]</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>[...] Web Analysis By Morad wrote an interesting post today on Will &acirc;open internet&acirc; IDM Migrate Towards &acirc;trust circles&acirc; ?Here&#8217;s a quick excerptBut I digress… Technorati Tags: deployment, openid, saml, Security, trust&#8230; [...]</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>Comment on New version of OpenID SAML comparison document by Openid &#187; New version of OpenID SAML comparison document</title>
		<link>http://identitymeme.org/archives/2008/01/21/new-version-of-openid-saml-comparison-document/#comment-12274</link>
		<dc:creator>Openid &#187; New version of OpenID SAML comparison document</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Mon, 21 Jan 2008 22:28:17 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://identitymeme.org/?p=61#comment-12274</guid>
		<description>[...] JeffH wrote an interesting post today on New version of OpenID SAML comparison documentHere&#8217;s a quick excerptI’ve done a modest editorial and copy editing update to the OpenID SAML technical comparison document announced earlier. Going forward, the latest rev will be available via this URL: &#8230; [...]</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>[...] JeffH wrote an interesting post today on New version of OpenID SAML comparison documentHere&#8217;s a quick excerptI’ve done a modest editorial and copy editing update to the OpenID SAML technical comparison document announced earlier. Going forward, the latest rev will be available via this URL: &#8230; [...]</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>Comment on (Draft) Technical Comparison: OpenID and SAML by IdentityMeme.org &#187; Blog Archive &#187; New version of OpenID SAML comparison document</title>
		<link>http://identitymeme.org/archives/2007/12/17/draft-technical-comparison-openid-and-saml/#comment-12273</link>
		<dc:creator>IdentityMeme.org &#187; Blog Archive &#187; New version of OpenID SAML comparison document</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Mon, 21 Jan 2008 20:54:39 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://identitymeme.org/?p=58#comment-12273</guid>
		<description>[...] I&#8217;ve done a modest editorial and copy editing update to the OpenID SAML technical comparison document announced earlier. Going forward, the latest rev will be available via this URL:  http://identitymeme.org/doc/draft-hodges-saml-openid-compare.html  Technorati Tags: authentication, Open Standards, openid, saml, Security, simplified sign on, single sign on [...]</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>[...] I&#8217;ve done a modest editorial and copy editing update to the OpenID SAML technical comparison document announced earlier. Going forward, the latest rev will be available via this URL:  <a href="http://identitymeme.org/doc/draft-hodges-saml-openid-compare.html" rel="nofollow">http://identitymeme.org/doc/draft-hodges-saml-openid-compare.html</a>  Technorati Tags: authentication, Open Standards, openid, saml, Security, simplified sign on, single sign on [...]</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>Comment on (Draft) Technical Comparison: OpenID and SAML by Hannes Tschofenig &#187; Technical Comparison: OpenID and SAML</title>
		<link>http://identitymeme.org/archives/2007/12/17/draft-technical-comparison-openid-and-saml/#comment-12252</link>
		<dc:creator>Hannes Tschofenig &#187; Technical Comparison: OpenID and SAML</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Wed, 09 Jan 2008 09:33:39 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://identitymeme.org/?p=58#comment-12252</guid>
		<description>[...] blogpost: (Draft) Technical Comparison: OpenID and SAML [...]</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>[...] blogpost: (Draft) Technical Comparison: OpenID and SAML [...]</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>Comment on Latest revisions of SAML-LSSO and SimpleSign specs by IdentityMeme.org &#187; Blog Archive &#187; Latest Revision of SAML HTTP POST-SimpleSign Binding Spec</title>
		<link>http://identitymeme.org/archives/2006/10/26/latest-revisions-of-saml-lsso-and-simplesign-specs/#comment-3844</link>
		<dc:creator>IdentityMeme.org &#187; Blog Archive &#187; Latest Revision of SAML HTTP POST-SimpleSign Binding Spec</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Fri, 02 Feb 2007 23:23:06 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://identitymeme.org/?p=40#comment-3844</guid>
		<description>[...] Note that this SAML Binding composes with the SAML-lSSO profile spec in order to realize a Lightweight SAML Web Browser SSO profile+binding where security and trust can be dialed from zero to full-on by implementors/deployers, as previously written about here. [...]</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>[...] Note that this SAML Binding composes with the SAML-lSSO profile spec in order to realize a Lightweight SAML Web Browser SSO profile+binding where security and trust can be dialed from zero to full-on by implementors/deployers, as previously written about here. [...]</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>Comment on A Cost Analysis of Windows Vista Content Protection by IdentityMeme.org &#187; Blog Archive &#187; Debate on Cost Analysis of Windows Vista Content Protection</title>
		<link>http://identitymeme.org/archives/2006/12/21/a-cost-analysis-of-windows-vista-content-protection/#comment-3787</link>
		<dc:creator>IdentityMeme.org &#187; Blog Archive &#187; Debate on Cost Analysis of Windows Vista Content Protection</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Fri, 26 Jan 2007 22:27:20 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://identitymeme.org/?p=49#comment-3787</guid>
		<description>[...] Well, I&#8217;m using the term &#8220;debate&#8221; loosely here because it seems to me, given the marshalled evidence, there isn&#8217;t much of a debate to be had, but in any case, Microsoft has responded to Peter Gutmann&#8217;s cost analysis of the DRM subsystems inWindows Vista (of which I&#8217;d written about earlier), and also in system hardware that has anything to do with handling of so-called &#8220;premium content&#8221; (i.e. content encoded onto newly emerging HD-DVD and Blu-Ray discs). Their reply is here..  Windows Vista Content Protection - Twenty Questions (and Answers) http://windowsvistablog.com/blogs/windowsvista/archive/2007/01/20/windows-vista-content-protection-twenty-questions-and-answers.aspx [...]</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>[...] Well, I&#8217;m using the term &#8220;debate&#8221; loosely here because it seems to me, given the marshalled evidence, there isn&#8217;t much of a debate to be had, but in any case, Microsoft has responded to Peter Gutmann&#8217;s cost analysis of the DRM subsystems inWindows Vista (of which I&#8217;d written about earlier), and also in system hardware that has anything to do with handling of so-called &#8220;premium content&#8221; (i.e. content encoded onto newly emerging HD-DVD and Blu-Ray discs). Their reply is here..  Windows Vista Content Protection - Twenty Questions (and Answers) <a href="http://windowsvistablog.com/blogs/windowsvista/archive/2007/01/20/windows-vista-content-protection-twenty-questions-and-answers.aspx" rel="nofollow">http://windowsvistablog.com/blogs/windowsvista/archive/2007/01/20/windows-vista-content-protection-twenty-questions-and-answers.aspx</a> [...]</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>Comment on How to Study and Learn SAML by Pushing String &#187; Simple signin&#8217;</title>
		<link>http://identitymeme.org/archives/2006/09/08/how-to-study-and-learn-saml/#comment-3566</link>
		<dc:creator>Pushing String &#187; Simple signin&#8217;</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Fri, 15 Sep 2006 22:07:42 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://identitymeme.org/archives/2006/09/08/how-to-study-and-learn-saml/#comment-3566</guid>
		<description>[...] JeffH is on fire lately. He&#8217;s one of the key people, along with Scott Cantor, who have been showing people just how easy it can be to &#8220;do SAML&#8221;. He put together a short document that explains the best entry points for reading the SAML specifications, and he and Scott have published a new version of their &#8220;no XML Signature&#8221; SAML binding, now called HTTP POST-SimpleSign. But wait, there&#8217;s more: They have also published an Internet-Draft spec that makes use of this binding, called the SAMLv2 Lightweight Web Browser SSO Profile. He&#8217;s got more interesting news besides &#8212; make sure to check it all out. [...]</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>[...] JeffH is on fire lately. He&#8217;s one of the key people, along with Scott Cantor, who have been showing people just how easy it can be to &#8220;do SAML&#8221;. He put together a short document that explains the best entry points for reading the SAML specifications, and he and Scott have published a new version of their &#8220;no XML Signature&#8221; SAML binding, now called HTTP POST-SimpleSign. But wait, there&#8217;s more: They have also published an Internet-Draft spec that makes use of this binding, called the SAMLv2 Lightweight Web Browser SSO Profile. He&#8217;s got more interesting news besides &#8212; make sure to check it all out. [...]</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>Comment on SAMLv2: HTTP POST &#8216;NoXMLdsig&#8217; Binding by IdentityMeme.org &#187; Blog Archive &#187; SAMLv2: HTTP Post-SimpleSign Binding</title>
		<link>http://identitymeme.org/archives/2006/06/13/samlv2-http-post-noxmldsig-binding/#comment-3561</link>
		<dc:creator>IdentityMeme.org &#187; Blog Archive &#187; SAMLv2: HTTP Post-SimpleSign Binding</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Fri, 08 Sep 2006 22:56:16 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://identitymeme.org/?p=21#comment-3561</guid>
		<description>[...] Scott Cantor and I have revised the SAML HTTP POST-NoXMLdsig binding, which I&#8217;d posted about a while back. [...]</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>[...] Scott Cantor and I have revised the SAML HTTP POST-NoXMLdsig binding, which I&#8217;d posted about a while back. [...]</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
</channel>
</rss>

