My Digital FootPrint

Professor Arun Sundararajan describes India’s fascinating digital identity initiative [youtube http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=RclLYHORnVo]

http://www.theshiftonline.com/ - recommended reading

  The level of identification can move from the simple to the complex, but where is the proof that the more complex is needed for all services?

source: http://www.readwriteweb.com/archives/hypothesis.php Hypothes.is aims to build nothing less than a  peer review layer for the whole Internet . It's a mind-boggling idea when you let it sink in.  Read the comments at the end, shame there are not more Personally I would content that Identity and Reputation are not the issues to solve (yet) the focus today is on "Authority" and "Trust"

It’s official: Google wants to own your online identity is the article is from GigaOm http://gigaom.com/2011/08/29/its-official-google-wants-to-own-your-online-identity/ using the same Image from Kat B Photography So Schmidt told it like it is at Edinburgh that an “identity service” unlocks the ability to do the trade and everyone goes into melt down. Why are you somewhat shocked that Google + plus  > than competing with Facebook.  As covered in numerous posts here previously, (social) signals are a critical part of Big Data but signals from real, authenticated, trusted real people with an identity means that you undertake a real "trade". Now lets not get sidelined by Real Name policy issues and the wider political implications;  lets just focus on the "trade or barter."  You give up data for access to FREE services, but the data cannot be identified means the value is smaller than knowing who you are. If they know who you are, the balance of value is f

This follows the story of Kaliya ( Identity Woman ) who still can't do this as her Google+ Name is still SUSPENDED!!!! and doesn't have name sovereignty. Worth reading her post on the issues Nymwars: IRL on Google's Lawns. We need to bring this struggle to Google IRL (In Real Life - physical, real world, meet space). Here is my thinking on why and my ideas about how. WHY: Even women with privileged access to Google insiders and who have real name handle combinations are not getting reinstated. Also read Steve Lockstep -- : http://lockstep.com.au/blog/2011/08/08/real-names-is-real-sly

Who creates your identity and what is a better one to identity you? [assuming you know for what!] ·         Your government – yes certificates ·         Your education – yes providing you with an approach, attitude, ability to adapt, reason and apply ·         Your parents – yes the physical and basis of a viewpoint ·         Your family and friends – yes the feedback and refinement ·         My influencers, filters and those I follow – those who change or challenge me ·         My news – that which I like and which confirms I am right ·         My bias – the way I am that I like to have reinforced ·         My beliefs that I like – will remain irrespective of circumstance ·         Me - my behaviour, habits, routes and routines Is My Identity is just a mashup of (My Digital Footprint) what has happened to me and those I chose to change me or enforce what I already am?

idAngels is at https://idangels.net/index.php It essentially asks people to verify others as who they say they are. “What matters (to individuals) is not being able to "prove who I am" to an organization, but that  nobody else can.” If you want an invite – let me know.

Last week I was at The Internet Identity Workshop (IIW) in San Jose organised by Doc Searls , Phil Windley and Kaliya Hamlin - it was very good with a diversity of representation based on geography and discipline; with start-up, government and a number of the big corporates represented all at very senior levels. Identity (whatever identity is) is a critical part of the overall trust framework of the Internet.  "I want to know you are not a dog" and featuring heavily in discussion and debate was..... 1. The U.S. government announcement of a new initiative called The National Strategy for Trusted Identities in Cyberspace (NSTIC) . The new program brings together government, industry and advocacy groups in order to build out what they’re calling an ” Identity Ecosystem ” in the private sector. 2. Standards and interoperability especially OpenID & OAUTH implementations and improvements 3. Personal lockers, data stores, users in control and VRM 4. Digital Death

The issue is not the framework but who wants to control you, your data and how do they give power to you if you want it?  [slideshare id=7557447&w=425&h=355&sc=no] 

Dirty Data is a term used when referring to inaccurate information or data collected during capture.  Dirty data can be misleading, incorrect, without generalised formatting, incorrectly spelled or punctuated, entered into the wrong field or duplicated. Dirty data can be prevented using input masks or validation rules, but completely removing such data from a source can be impossible or impractical There are several causes of dirty data. In some cases, the information is deliberately distorted. A person may insert misleading or fictional personal information which appears real. Such dirty data may not be picked up by an administrator or a validation routine because it appears legitimate. Duplicate data can be caused by repeat submissions, user error or incorrect data joining. There can also be formatting issues or typographical errors. A common formatting issue is caused by variations in a user's preference for entering phone numbers. The reason for looking at this topic was

Roger Grimes posted a very insightful blog about reuse of user ID and passwords, with the usual sprinkling of fairy dust and FUD to create sales for security experts, however it co-insides with Microsoft publishing some data about the reuse of passwords on different web sites and a very good research paper from INRIA in France which asked “ How unique and traceable are usernames ” Essentially can identities established on multiple web sites be linked together based on the usernames to recreate an “identity” and what are the implications for privacy?  INRIA experiment looked at over 10 million usernames from popular services such as Google and eBay. In some of the tests, Google profiles that listed multiple accounts on different web services were used to establish “ground truth” about linked usernames. The first finding was that the usernames chosen by people on the various websites tend to be very unique, with a probability of duplication being approximately one in one billion. Thi

Roger Grimes posted a very insightful blog about reuse of user ID and passwords, with the usual sprinkling of fairy dust and FUD to create sales for security experts, however it co-insides with Microsoft publishing some data about the reuse of passwords on different web sites and a very good research paper from INRIA in France which asked “ How unique and traceable are usernames ” Essentially can identities established on multiple web sites be linked together based on the usernames to recreate an “identity” and what are the implications for privacy?  INRIA experiment looked at over 10 million usernames from popular services such as Google and eBay. In some of the tests, Google profiles that listed multiple accounts on different web services were used to establish “ground truth” about linked usernames. The first finding was that the usernames chosen by people on the various websites tend to be very unique, with a probability of duplication being approximately one in one billion. Thi

Roger Grimes posted a very insightful blog about reuse of user ID and passwords, with the usual sprinkling of fairy dust and FUD to create sales for security experts, however it co-insides with Microsoft publishing some data about the reuse of passwords on different web sites and a very good research paper from INRIA in France which asked “ How unique and traceable are usernames ” Essentially can identities established on multiple web sites be linked together based on the usernames to recreate an “identity” and what are the implications for privacy?  INRIA experiment looked at over 10 million usernames from popular services such as Google and eBay. In some of the tests, Google profiles that listed multiple accounts on different web services were used to establish “ground truth” about linked usernames. The first finding was that the usernames chosen by people on the various websites tend to be very unique, with a probability of duplication being approximately one in one billion. Thi

Original BBC story http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-england-london-11945774 MET REQUESTS TO TfL 2007 - 4,939; denied 747 2008 - 6,074; denied 1,279 2009 - 5,619, denied 918 2010 - 6,576, denied 810 The Met Police has made record requests for data on London commuters, a majority of whom use Oyster smartcards, the Green Party has said. Transport for London (TfL) figures show the Met made 6,576 requests in 2010, but it was turned down 810 times. Noel Lynch, chairman of London Green Party, called for "rigorous safeguards to protect people's privacy". The Met said the rise in requests was due to the rise in Oyster usage as the data helps trace a person's movement. Figures obtained by the Green Party from TfL show that in 2007 the Met made 4,939 requests, but 747 of those requests were turned down. The number of requests rose to 6,074 in 2008, of which 1,279 were turned down. In 2009 police requests fell to 5,619 in 2009, but the Met were denied information on 91

Eric Schmidt (CEO Google ) said in an interview earlier this year that people will change their name, then retracted the comment saying it was a joke in an interview with Stephen Colbert , however a new survey from One Path, Melborne has revealed that several young people are on a name-changing spree on Facebook in order to escape their digital footprint, suggesting that the Google chief may have been on the money! The survey of more than 1000 Australians has found that 8 per cent would consider changing their name to escape their digital footprint. Un-surprisingly most of them are youngsters - 14 percent of those between 18 and 25 said they'd consider changing their name, while less than 3 per cent of those over 60 said they would. The survey was commissioned by One Path , formerly ING Australia.

In the good old days there was the phone book.  A list of all phone numbers in your area.  You could flick through this open, public record and find out where someone lived and their phone number.  Easy, simple and in black and white delivered to your door. Back in 2006 when Ajit Jaokar and I wrote "Mobile Web 2.0" we created an idea about "I am a tag and not a number" - which was to become a bedrock of PhoneBook 2.0 thinking.  The thinking was that phone books will die as the phone number is dead; you will become what others tag you as.  This move would allow phonebooks to move on from a disconnected phone number and become an connected action and activity delivering: book a meeting, message, call, IM, find and locate, In the old model you trusted the company who printed the phone book to remove (in the next addition) your details if you so wanted.  However, once printed there was always a copy at the library if you wanted older versions to see if someone ha

In the good old days there was the phone book.  A list of all phone numbers in your area.  You could flick through this open, public record and find out where someone lived and their phone number.  Easy, simple and in black and white delivered to your door. Back in 2006 when Ajit Jaokar and I wrote "Mobile Web 2.0" we created an idea about "I am a tag and not a number" - which was to become a bedrock of PhoneBook 2.0 thinking.  The thinking was that phone books will die as the phone number is dead; you will become what others tag you as.  This move would allow phonebooks to move on from a disconnected phone number and become an connected action and activity delivering: book a meeting, message, call, IM, find and locate, In the old model you trusted the company who printed the phone book to remove (in the next addition) your details if you so wanted.  However, once printed there was always a copy at the library if you wanted older versions to see if someone ha

In the good old days there was the phone book.  A list of all phone numbers in your area.  You could flick through this open, public record and find out where someone lived and their phone number.  Easy, simple and in black and white delivered to your door. Back in 2006 when Ajit Jaokar and I wrote "Mobile Web 2.0" we created an idea about "I am a tag and not a number" - which was to become a bedrock of PhoneBook 2.0 thinking.  The thinking was that phone books will die as the phone number is dead; you will become what others tag you as.  This move would allow phonebooks to move on from a disconnected phone number and become an connected action and activity delivering: book a meeting, message, call, IM, find and locate, In the old model you trusted the company who printed the phone book to remove (in the next addition) your details if you so wanted.  However, once printed there was always a copy at the library if you wanted older versions to see if someone ha

Don’t forget to do a factory reset before you pass it on – or you will compromise your identity, privacy, security, reputation ……