- iot-wg - mailman.ripe.net

IoT WG Survey
by Constanze Dietrich 11 Jan '21

11 Jan '21

Hi everyone! First of all, I wish all of you and your loved ones a happy and healthy 2021! To kick off the new year in the IoT WG, Sandoche and I come at you with a little survey. As announced during the last RIPE Meeting, we'd like to get to know you, learn what you think of and expect from the Working Group, what you'd like to see us do as co-chairs, what RIPE- and IoT-related topics you're interested in,... feedback that may help us, for instance, get a feeling for what we should push for and what you've possibly seen enough of by now. While we use this survey as a tool to collect feedback beyond the bounds of the list, we intend to publish and discuss the results on the IoT WG mailing list. So as to not repeat myself any further, you'll find a little more information after clicking the link to the survey. :) https://docs.google.com/forms/d/e/1FAIpQLSdVVq38C96Mn_Lv8eDgiHGzt3TgzPfx_MM… Cheers and kind regards Constanze & Sandoche

1 0

A Haystack Full of Needles: Scalable Detection of IoT Devices in the Wild
by Mandalari, Anna Maria 13 Dec '20

13 Dec '20

Hi all, We have published an interesting work on consumer IoT devices detection at an ISP and IXP. You can find all the details at https://moniotrlab.ccis.neu.edu/imc20/ The paper will be presented at IMC 2020. I thought it can be interesting for you :) Cheers, -- Anna Maria Mandalari Research Associate Dyson School of Design Engineering Imperial College London https://www.imperial.ac.uk/people/anna-maria.mandalari

2 1

IoT device lifecycle work
by Eliot Lear 21 Nov '20

21 Nov '20

We authors continue to work on the IOT white paper we presented at the last meeting (see attached) and would like to address any comments you might have. One question we have is whether people would prefer access to the Google Doc to add comments or whether a Github issue tracker would be better. We hope to complete this document by the end of the year, so comments now would be very welcome. See attached. Eliot

1 0

Results of the survey made during the second today's presentation
by sandoche Balakrichenan 30 Oct '20

30 Oct '20

Dear all, Please find as attached the results of the survey conducted today during the presentation of "*Architectural Considerations for IoT Device Security in the Home. A guide for ISPs specifying CPE devices*" at RIPE 81 IoT WG slot today.

3 5

Re: [iot-wg] IoT BCOP TF Document - Call for comments
by e.vanuden＠avm.de 27 Oct '20

27 Oct '20

Hi Eliot, I´m refering to the Stacked Router concept, so one CPE instead of two (stacked) In this case, the CPE Best regards, Eric van Uden AVM ICT GmbH Country Manager Netherlands Mr. van Coothlaan 10 6602 GT Wijchen Nederland Phone +31 24 6485381 Mobile +31 622 948356 e.vanuden(a)avm.de Bezoek onze website op http://nl.avm.de/ , vind ons leuk op Facebook of bekijk onze Google +-pagina en Youtube-kanaal. AVM GmbH for International Communication Technology, Alt-Moabit 95, 10559 Berlin, Germany HRB 48220 AG Charlottenburg, CEO (Geschäftsführer): Johannes Nill Von: "Eliot Lear" <lear(a)ofcourseimright.com> An: e.vanuden(a)avm.de, "sandoche Balakrichenan" <sandoche.balakrichenan(a)afnic.fr> Kopie: iot-wg(a)ripe.net Datum: 26-10-2020 14:21 Betreff: Re: [iot-wg] IoT BCOP TF Document - Call for comments Hi Eric, On 26.10.20 14:18, Eric van Uden via iot-wg wrote: For me this means that IoT security should be implemented in as little as possible devices connection the consumer to the internet - one device if at all possible thus avoiding stacked router scenarios that add unnecessary complexity and possibly even more IoT security issues. Precisely which device would you expect that to be: The CPE or the IOT device? Eliot

3 3

IoT BCOP TF Document - Call for comments
by sandoche Balakrichenan 26 Oct '20

26 Oct '20

Dear all, The IoT BCOP TF (/Jim Reid, Eliott Lear, Michael Richardson, Phil Stanhope, Peter Steinhäuser, Jelte Jansen, Jan Zorz, Sandoche Balakrichenan/) has been meeting almost every friday since RIPE 80 to produce the document titled : /"Architectural Considerations for IoT Device Security in the Home - //A guide for ISPs specifying CPE devices"/. The intention is to publish the final version of this document as RIPE Best Current Operational Practice (BCOP) document in the IoT scope. A Pdf format of the document is attached. Thanks for sending your comments on this document to the mailing list. Constanze & Sandoche (IoT WG Chairs)

4 3

Reminder: IoT WG (and friends) virtual Meetup tonight!
by Constanze Dietrich 26 Oct '20

26 Oct '20

*** Cancel all your dates! *** Tonight from 19:00 to 21:00 CET (UTC+1) we'll have our virtual Meetup "at the hotel bar"! Location: https://ripe.zoom.us/j/96850826494?pwd=ZGFlbFNRZTZZTnBZU1JiWWNNRms0dz09#suc… Meeting ID: 968 5082 6494 Passcode: 391117 Hope to see you all there! Constanze & Sandoche

1 0

Re: [iot-wg] IoT BCOP TF Document - Call for comments
by Michael Richardson 23 Oct '20

23 Oct '20

<#secure method=pgpmime mode=sign> sb> The IoT BCOP TF (/Jim Reid, Eliott Lear, Michael Richardson, Phil sb> Stanhope, Peter Steinhäuser, Jelte Jansen, Jan Zorz, Sandoche sb> Balakrichenan/) has been meeting almost every friday since RIPE 80 to sb> produce the document titled : /"Architectural Considerations for IoT sb> Device Security in the Home - //A guide for ISPs specifying CPE sb> devices"/. The intention is to publish the final version of this sb> document as RIPE Best Current Operational Practice (BCOP) document in sb> the IoT scope. Some feedback that we have received is that the document isn't able to provide clear guidance that would make it a BCOP. It is perhaps more of a technical report. An initial goal had been to be able to say what ISPs are currently doing with IoT devices, and thereby enable those who are writing RFPs to know what kind of things they might expect to be able to ask for. But, it's still too soon for that. So a question is: what category should we put on this document? -- Michael Richardson <mcr+IETF(a)sandelman.ca> . o O ( IPv6 IøT consulting ) Sandelman Software Works Inc, Ottawa and Worldwide

1 0

RIPE81 agenda and virtual meetup on 26 October
by Constanze Dietrich 20 Oct '20

20 Oct '20

Hi everyone! We've got two announcements regarding the upcoming RIPE meeting! ***** THE AGENDA for the IoT session of RIPE 81 (27 to 30 October) is set! ***** You can find the full Meeting Plan here: https://ripe81.ripe.net/programme/meeting-plan/ This time, we have 45 minutes on Thursday, 29 October, between 14:00 and 14:45 CET (UTC+1): -- Introduction (5 minutes) -- RIPE NCC IoT Update - MarcoHogewoning (10 minutes) -- Architectural Considerations for IoT Device Security in the Home: A guide for ISPs specifying CPE devices - IoT BCOP Task Force (30 minutes) [Quick reminder to review their work and help them with constructive feedback: https://www.ripe.net/ripe/mail/archives/iot-wg/attachments/20201013/5ab7a0d… ] ***** VIRTUAL MEETUP of the IoT WG (and friends) on Monday, 26 October, 19:00 to 21:00 CET (UTC+1) ***** As having 15 minutes more on hand than last time is certainly no substitute for coffee and lunch breaks, beerings or other social gatherings, we've arranged for a virtual get-together on Monday evening before RIPE 81 as a Zoom meeting. There's no agenda! We'd like to say hi, get to see and know each other, and have a few drinks of our choice together at the virtual "hotel bar". You'll find the link to the Zoom meeting here: https://ripe81.ripe.net/programme/parallel-events/#iot Hope to see you there! Constanze & Sandoche (IoT WG Chairs)

1 0

Fwd: interesting article
by sandoche Balakrichenan 05 Oct '20

05 Oct '20

Dear all, Vesna (RIPE) send us the following article ("Security Considerations for Internet of Things: A Survey"), which I am sure will be an interesting read. === https://link.springer.com/article/10.1007%2Fs42979-020-00201-3 Survey Article Published: 06 June 2020 Security Considerations for Internet of Things: A Survey Anca Jurcut, Tiberiu Niculcea, Pasika Ranaweera & Nhien-An Le-Khac === Sandoche.

1 0