Re: U2F Demo

On mið 28.maí 2014 17:12, Anders Rundgren wrote:
> A "funny" thing is that the current U2F specification squarely
> matches the needs of WebPayments and WebID due to U2F's SOP-based
> trust model.
What's the first factor?

If U2F is "ubiquitous second factor", you still need the first factor to
log in. Not to mention the identity itself. So the best-case scenario
here is that U2F helps fill into the immediate "how do I log in"
question - but the question we've been talking the most about is "how do
we make identity information shareable in a standard way".

Flatly, I don't see how anything in either WebID or Identity Credentials
clashes with the use of U2F. Sure, both specify their own, distinct,
authentication mechanisms - but the identity management aspects are
pretty clearly distinct, focus on issues that it appears to me U2F does
not, and _do not mandate the use of the authentication mechanism_.

So what's the issue, exactly? Apart from the fact that differences
between WebID and Identity Credentials are non-existent aside from the
fact that one is specified in terms of RDF and the other is specified in
terms of JSON and uses JSON-LD to map that to RDF?

With greetings,
  Herbert Snorrason