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 firmly with the holder. 

The issue is not about being (or becoming) an Identity Gatekeeper as that will end in regulatory quagmire and in reality you cannot own an Identity, just as you cannot demand faith, command trust or request a reputation. Therefore, lets assume a world in which there is an economy where real people have real cash who want to spend said real cash on real products and services, then knowing who you are could kind of like be helpful.

This is not about identity but is about how you trade for goods.  Image a token with your face on it, which represents your ability to trade? - called money.

This follows the story of Kaliya (Identity Woman) who still can't do this 

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 - what happens when

5. Lots of demos .....

All of the workshop notes are here

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?

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 due to the requirement asked of me the other day for "A Fake Location"  A user wanted to be somewhere that did not exist and therefore the data from their tweets would not lead fans to find them or track them.  It would allow them to hide in plane site.  The concept quickly became location, IP, caller ID and other data that would identify them.

However, worth noting this research paper where re-construction of your ID, even with fake data, is possible.  There is not hiding.....

For the rest of us fake locations apps for Android  are here http://www.androidzoom.com/android_applications/fake%20locations

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. This was true for a variety of web services, including a corporate network, Finnish web forums, and MySpace.

Second, the researchers found that when people used different usernames for different services, many of the usernames were constructed by making very small changes to existing usernames (e.g., sarah, sarah2).

Third, the study demonstrated that more than 50% of the usernames created for different services could be linked to one another because the username was identical, or very similar, and unique from other usernames.

Whilst privacy is a setting and you choice to limit the data about yourself on a case by case basis which each digital service (ebay, picasa, flickr, facebook, twitter, google, blogger, etc, if your profile can be linked to other services from other providers than it would appear to be feasible to build a more detailed personal profile from the various bits of partial information.

That being the theory someone quickly wrote a software application as a demonstration that theory has some justification. A quick examination of people using anonymous file sharing services (private BitTorrent trackers) found that 13 out of the 20 usernames examined could be linked to other web services (e.g., YouTube, eBay) and 4 usernames could be linked to real-world identities.

Two Sides

1.      Having everything linked could save you a lot of time and bring you value and so what these are not critical services (but I bet you use the same for banking…)  Google will do this for you (new service 17 Feb 2010) as part of their social search.

2.      Breach one, breach all.

Outcome

We need something better then Username and Passwords

Image from http://twitter.com/#!/STOP_IDFRAUDUK 

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 918 instances.

The requests soared to 6,576 in 2010 until the end of October, but TfL turned down fewer police requests (810) - the lowest since 2008.

Mr Lynch said: "The vast majority of these requests are for Oyster card data.

"While this information may have a role to play as an investigative tool in certain circumstances it is vital that there are rigorous safeguards to protect people's privacy."

"There is clearly a risk that TfL could be overwhelmed with requests or otherwise pressured into handing over personal data without sufficient checks."

Request rise 'proportionate'

A Met spokesman said: "Each case is looked at individually but such information could be used to build up a picture of a person's movements.

"If a line of inquiry was identified that required Oyster card data then the officer would request the information from Transport for London.

"As Oyster cards become more widely used, it is likely that such requests will rise in proportion with their usage."

A TfL spokeswoman said: "Law enforcement, including police, requests for information on the Oyster system are subject to strict rules and procedures. Each request must relate to a specific police investigation.

"TfL considers each and every request on a case-by-case basis and in accordance with the Data Protection Act.

"Only a few authorised individuals within Transport for London can access this data."

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.