November 2016 - iot-wg - mailman.ripe.net

Re: [iot-discussion] iot-discussion Digest, Vol 1, Issue 5
by Corinne Cath 24 Nov '16

24 Nov '16

Thanks for sharing Gordon, and good question Shane.. I found the article a bit lacking in terms of a clear reason why regulation is *the* main way forward. It is not said that if you leave the regulation of IoT in the hands of several different goverments across the world that you get better security standards all-round. More likely, you will get certain jurisdictions that do a good job and others that don't. I also feel that the call for governments to take this up really opens the door to legitimizing the ongoing efforts at the ITU to make it the hub for IoT standard development. And looking at the recent discussions on Over the Top (OTT) services and DOA at the ITU-D WTSA meeting, I am not sure that is good solution. Rather, it would be great if we could find a way to look at soft law options and encourage the technical actors responsible for developing security considerations to take the importance of strong security for IoT on board, if only because if they don't people will lose trust in them and their stuff they build. And there I see a clear role for RIPE and its members. Happy to further discuss! Best, On Tue, Nov 22, 2016 at 11:00 AM, <iot-discussion-request(a)ripe.net> wrote: > Send iot-discussion mailing list submissions to > iot-discussion(a)ripe.net > > To subscribe or unsubscribe via the World Wide Web, visit > https://lists.ripe.net/mailman/listinfo/iot-discussion > or, via email, send a message with subject or body 'help' to > iot-discussion-request(a)ripe.net > > You can reach the person managing the list at > iot-discussion-owner(a)ripe.net > > When replying, please edit your Subject line so it is more specific > than "Re: Contents of iot-discussion digest..." > > > Today's Topics: > > 1. Re: Regulating the IoT (Shane Kerr) > > > ---------------------------------------------------------------------- > > Message: 1 > Date: Tue, 22 Nov 2016 12:51:10 +0800 > From: Shane Kerr <shane(a)time-travellers.org> > To: Gordon Lennox <gordon.lennox.13(a)gmail.com> > Cc: iot-discussion(a)ripe.net > Subject: Re: [iot-discussion] Regulating the IoT > Message-ID: <20161122125110.47650945(a)pallas.home.time-travellers.org> > Content-Type: text/plain; charset="utf-8" > > Gordon, > > At 2016-11-18 14:10:52 +0100 > Gordon Lennox <gordon.lennox.13(a)gmail.com> wrote: > > > You can read Bruce Schneier?s take here: > > > > https://www.washingtonpost.com/posteverything/wp/2016/11/ > 03/your-wifi-connected-thermostat-can-take-down-the- > whole-internet-we-need-new-regulations/ > > > > And here: > > > > https://www.schneier.com/crypto-gram/archives/2016/1115.html > > He's not wrong. But is there a path to reasonable regulation? Can RIPE > help facilitate this in any way? > > Cheers, > > -- > Shane >

4 4

[iot-discussion] Regulating the IoT
by Gordon Lennox 24 Nov '16

24 Nov '16

You can read Bruce Schneier’s take here: https://www.washingtonpost.com/posteverything/wp/2016/11/03/your-wifi-conne… And here: https://www.schneier.com/crypto-gram/archives/2016/1115.html

3 3

[iot-discussion] Seeking Input: IGF workshop "Finding the Internet in IoT"
by Marco Hogewoning 23 Nov '16

23 Nov '16

[apologies for duplicates] Dear colleagues, As mentioned during our BoF, RIPE NCC is, together with some colleagues from other RIRs, organising an IoT workshop during the upcoming Internet Governance Forum in Guadalajara. The full title of this workshop is: "The Network of Networked Things: Finding the Internet in IoT”. With a broad panel of experts from several SDOs (IETF, IEEE), industry (GSMA) and Internet Governance area, we aim to address the following questions: - What are the needs of IoT vendors and operators in Internet governance and administration? - Can the existing structures of Internet governance, both technical and administrative, adapt to meet the needs of the IoT? - To what extent are openness and transparency important as Internet governance evolves to accommodate IoT? - Recognising that not all IoT applications rely on common open Internet standards, what are the benefits of an open model over the choice for proprietary technology, also in terms of security, interoperability and continuity of service? - What are the implications of widespread deployment of IoT for “the Internet as we know it”? We are happy to take your input on board for this workshop, both in additional questions or answers to the items above. We further would encourage people to attend this workshop, either in in person in Mexico or via the remote participations options that will be provided. The workshop is currently scheduled for “Day 1”, Tuesday December 6 from 09:00 - 10:30 local time, which would be 15:00 UTC. Regards, Marco Hogewoning -- External Relations - RIPE NCC

1 0

[iot-discussion] Pending report from Madrid
by Marco Hogewoning 22 Nov '16

22 Nov '16

Dear colleagues, As some of you have asked, we do still owe you a report of our session in Madrid. Apologies for the delay in that, as it turns out some of our records are still hiding in one of the flight cases. We’ll try and provide a more detailed record of the proceedings as soon as those files become available to us. Meanwhile, recapping the discussion the discussion at a very high level, one of the things flagged was the need for more information exchange and discussion. We hope that with the creation of this list, we have catered for this need. Another main item was the security threat and more important vendor behaviour towards providing adequate security on the individual devices and gadgets that make up the IoT. As several articles and documents posted to this list show, we seem not alone and those concerns play a role with many stakeholders. Now I don’t think or even expect we would have an immediate solution to this. Mentioned during the session was the need for more transparency or education of the end users. Again it seems we are not alone in this thinking and the idea of some “IoT trust label” have also been floated in other forums such as the AIOTI alliance. Finally I recall some comments being made towards the actual impact on “the Internet as we know it” and the infrastructure we collectively operate. Something that I also felt a bit coming back at some of the discussion at IETF last week and to which there does not seem a single overall view. Most seem to agree that the fundamental design of the Internet will not change dramatically, but as soon as it comes down to details it appears there could be changes on the horizon because of different demand for resources, concerns around scalability and of course security of both participating devices as well as the network itself. Regards, Marco Hogewoning -- External Relations - RIPE NCC

1 0

[iot-discussion] US Homeland Security published recommendations for IoT Security
by Wolfgang Tremmel 18 Nov '16

18 Nov '16

Hello List, German heise.de Newsservice just published an article (in German, sorry) about a publication of US Homeland Security: https://www.heise.de/downloads/18/2/0/3/5/4/8/9/DHS-Strategic-Principles-Se… best regards Wolfgang heise.de article in German: https://www.heise.de/security/meldung/Internet-of-Things-US-Regierung-veroe… -- Wolfgang Tremmel Phone +49 69 1730902 26 | Fax +49 69 4056 2716 | Mobile +49 171 8600 816 | wolfgang.tremmel(a)de-cix.net Geschaeftsfuehrer Harald A. Summa | Registergericht AG Köln HRB 51135 DE-CIX Management GmbH | Lindleystrasse 12 | 60314 Frankfurt am Main | Germany | www.de-cix.net

5 6

[iot-discussion] IETF Internet-of-Things Directorate chartered
by Marco Hogewoning 18 Nov '16

18 Nov '16

Dear colleagues, During the IETF meeting this week in Seoul it was announced that IETF has formed a specialised directorate for IoT related matters, this is part of the Internet area. More information about the charter and the current members can be found at https://trac.ietf.org/trac/int/wiki/IOTDirWiki FYIt, MarcoH

1 0

[iot-discussion] Welcome to IoT Discussion
by Marco Hogewoning 03 Nov '16

03 Nov '16

Hi all, This list was created to facilitate the exchange of information concerning the Internet of Things, particularly as it may have impact on RIPE NCC, RIPE or our stakeholders' operations. The list is also a platform to inform each other about proceedings in other relevant standards bodies or governance structures, and may be used to discuss and formulate common positions amongst participants on IoT related topics. Regards, MarcoH

1 0