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 governments 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@ripe.net> wrote:

Send iot-discussion mailing list submissions to
        iot-discussion@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@ripe.net

You can reach the person managing the list at
        iot-discussion-owner@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@time-travellers.org>
To: Gordon Lennox <gordon.lennox.13@gmail.com>
Cc: iot-discussion@ripe.net
Subject: Re: [iot-discussion] Regulating the IoT
Message-ID: <20161122125110.47650945@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@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
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: not available
Type: application/pgp-signature
Size: 833 bytes
Desc: OpenPGP digital signature
URL: <https://lists.ripe.net/ripe/mail/archives/iot-discussion/attachments/20161122/28de5dbb/attachment-0001.sig>

------------------------------

Subject: Digest Footer

_______________________________________________
iot-discussion mailing list
iot-discussion@ripe.net
https://lists.ripe.net/mailman/listinfo/iot-discussion


------------------------------

End of iot-discussion Digest, Vol 1, Issue 5
********************************************

--

Corinne J.N. Cath
Ph.D. Candidate, Oxford Internet Institute & Alan Turing Institute

Web: www.oii.ox.ac.uk/people/corinne-cath
Email: ccath@turing.ac.uk & corinnecath@gmail.com
Twitter: @C_Cath

_______________________________________________
iot-discussion mailing list
iot-discussion@ripe.net
https://lists.ripe.net/mailman/listinfo/iot-discussion