to random third parties. The principle of least astonishment would suggest
that we should do the same here.
+> This part is now addressed by cloaking email addresses:
+> `smcv@debian.org` → `smcv@02f3eecb59311fc89970578832b63d57a071579e`
+> (that's the sha1sum of `mailto:smcv@debian.org`, as used in FOAF).
+> --[[smcv]]
+
(The expectation of privacy for direct git commits is rather different:
I think we can expect direct git committers to know that they
should either set a plausible non-email-address in their git identity,
users with / in their names, which would make their user-page into a
subpage?
+ > I have fixed passwordauth to not let urls be registered. It seems this
+ > was not quite a security hole; it didn't let registering a username that
+ > already existed, so if an openid was an admin, as long as the user logged
+ > in using that openid, someone else couldn't come along and passwordauth
+ > collide with it. (Might be exploitable if you could guess an openid that
+ > was going to be added as an admin later though.) --[[Joey]]
+
* If passwordauth is enabled, accounts may have a password. Users can
authenticate to an account that has a password by entering that password.
The username is always the account name (because there's little reason
>
> Also, when you talk about "separating authentication from authorization", i immediately thought of [[todo/ACL/]] and [[todo/Zoned_ikiwiki/]], so i thought i could mention those... having stability in the usernames would help in the design of those... --[[anarcat]]
-> I'm not against this, but I don't anticipate having resources to do any
-> work on it either. --[[Joey]]
-
-> I have fixed passwordauth to not let urls be registered. It seems this
-> was not quite a security hole; it didn't let registering a name that
-> already existed, so if an openid was an admin, as long as the user logged
-> in using that openid, someone else couldn't come along and passwordauth
-> collide with it. (Might be exploitable if you could guess an openid that
-> was going to be added as an admin though.) --[[Joey]]
+> I'm not opposed to this, but I don't anticipate having resources to do any
+> work on it either. (I do hope to obscure email addresses from git
+> commits.) --[[Joey]]