What's the difference between OpenID and OAuth?

Question

I'm really trying to understand the difference between OpenID and OAuth? Maybe they're two totally separate things and I'm just totally confused. Could someone explain it to me please?

Thanks!

Answer 1

OpenID is (mainly) for identification/authentication, so that stackoverflow.com knows that I own chris.boyle.name (or wherever) and therefore that I am probably the same person who owned chris.boyle.name yesterday and earned some reputation points.

OAuth is designed for authorisation to take actions on your behalf, so that stackoverflow.com (or wherever) can ask permission to, say, Tweet on your behalf automatically, without knowing your Twitter password.

Answer 2

OAuth, OpenID…they sound like the same thing and they kind of do vaguely similar things But I’m here to tell you, OAuth is not Open ID

Answer 3

OpenID is about authentication (ie. proving who you are), OAuth is about authorisation (ie. to grant access to functionality/data/etc.. without having to deal with the original authentication).

OAuth could be used in external partner sites to allow access to protected data without them having to re-authenticate a user.

The blog post "OpenID versus OAuth from the user’s perspective" has a simple comparison of the two from the user's perspective and "OAuth-OpenID: You’re Barking Up the Wrong Tree if you Think They’re the Same Thing" has more information about it.

Answer 4

OAuth

Used for delegated authorization only -- meaning you are authorizing a third-party service access to use personal data, without giving out a password. Also OAuth "sessions" generally live longer than user sessions. Meaning that OAuth is designed to allow authorization

i.e. Flickr uses OAuth to allow third-party services to post and edit a persons picture on their behalf, without them having to give out their flicker username and password.

OpenID

Used to authenticate single sign-on identity. All OpenID is supposed to do is allow an OpenID provider to prove that you say you are. However many sites use identity authentication to provide authorization (however the two can be separated out)

i.e. One shows their passport at the airport to authenticate (or prove) the person's who's name is on the ticket they are using is them.

Answer 5

OpenID and OAuth are each HTTP-based protocols for authentication and/or authorization. Both are intended to allow users to perform actions without giving authentication credentials or blanket permissions to clients or third parties. While they are similar, and there are proposed standards to use them both together, they are separate protocols.

OpenID is intended for federated authentication. A client accepts an identity assertion from any provider (although clients are free to whitelist or blacklist providers).

OAuth is intended for delegated authorization. A client registers with a provider, which provides authorization tokens which it will accept to perform actions on the user's behalf.

OAuth is currently better suited for authorization, because further interactions after authentication are built into the protocol, but both protocols are evolving. OpenID and its extensions could be used for authorization, and OAuth can be used for authentication, which can be thought of as a no-op authorization.

Answer 6

Here is the brilliantly clear explanation. Coming directly from the OAuth documentation.

Answer 7

More an extension to the question than an answer, but it may add some perspective to the great technical answers above. I'm an experienced programmer in a number of areas, but a total noob to programming for the web. Now trying to build a web-based application using Zend Framework.

Definitely will implement an application-specific basic username/password authentication interface, but recognize that for a growing number of users the thought of yet another username and password is a deterrent. While not exactly social networking, I know that a very large percentage of the application's potential users already have facebook or twitter accounts. The application doesn't really want or need to access information about the user's account from those sites, it just wants to offer the convenience of not requiring the user to set up new account credentials if they don't want to. From a functionality point of view, that would seem a poster child for OpenID. But it seems that neither facebook nor twitter are OpenID providers as such, though they do support OAuth authentication to access their user's data.

In all the articles I've read about the two and how they differ, it wan't until I saw Karl Anderson's observation above, that "OAuth can be used for authentication, which can be thought of as a no-op authorization" that I saw any explicit confirmation that OAuth was good enough for what I wanted to do.

In fact, when I went to post this "answer", not being a member at the time, I looked long and hard at the bottom of this page at the options for identifying myself. The option for using an OpenID login or obtaining one if I didn't have one, but nothing about twitter or facebook, seemed to suggest that OAuth wasn't adequate for the job. But then I opened another window and looked for the general signup process for stackoverflow - and lo and behold there's a slew of 3rd-party authentication options including facebook and twitter. In the end I decided to use my google id (which is an OpenID) for exactly the reason that I didn't want to grant stackoverflow access to my friends list and anything else facebook likes to share about its users - but at least it's a proof point that OAuth is adequate for the use I had in mind.

It would really be great if someone could either post info or pointers to info about supporting this kind of multiple 3rd-part authorization setup, and how you deal with users that revoke authorization or lose access to their 3rd party site. I also get the impression that my username here identifies a unique stackoverflow account that I could access with basic authentication if I wanted to set it up, and also access this same account through other 3rd-party authenticators (e.g. so that I would be considered logged in to stackoverflow if I was logged in to any of google, facebook, or twitter...). Since this site is doing it, somebody here probably has some pretty good insight on the subject. :-)

Sorry this was so long, and more a question than an answer - but Karl's remark made it seem like the most appropriate place to post amidst the volume of threads on OAuth and OpenID. If there's a better place for this that I didn't find, I apologize in advance, I did try.