See also: IRC log
<scribe> scribenick: dsr
Oliver starts by looking at the landscape document.
We have to more than reporting about the available mechanisms.
Oliver invites help with filling out the page on the landscape of security and privacy means
He is hoping to have this page fleshed out in the next 2 weeks and to then discuss it in the next TF-SP call.
Any questions/comments?
Edoardo: re the table on that page, it would be interesting to provide a description of what each requirement means.
Oliver: what you’re saying is also what we have in mind.
The table is little awkward, e.g. requiring too much scrolling. I expect to look at a more convenient structure, but without losing information.
It would be interesting to look at the distinction between same domain and cross domain scenarios.
The second point is on architectural impact of security technologies, e.g. authentication and authorisation.
You may need specific libraries and certificates etc.
The third point concerns the origin/heritage of security & privacy mechanisms, e.g. those that are not native to the IoT.
The fourth point is on maturity. We need to evaluate the maturity especially for relatively new mechanisms.
For use cases, we have classic use cases, and new ones with no direct analogies in the classical IT world.
Examples include authorisation for discovery.
We need a section on conclusions and recommendations. I have some points I want to cover here.
Any comments on this list? [no]
We can review frameworks in parallel and incrementally. Right now we have just a collection.
Edoardo: on the frameworks it would be useful to have a common structure to review each framework
Oliver: I have limited time right now for a detailed analysis of the frameworks, and have instead focused on the mechanisms.
The current suggestion is to adopt the approach taken by the IIC.
Any further comments/questions about the landscape survey? [no]
Not much activity in last 2 weeks. Oliver notes that he participated in a TF-DI call to select a use case for analysis.
He is planning on some richer interactions with people on particular use cases.
We have a list of terms as a glossary, picked from a number of sources.
If anything is not clear, please provide feedback so we can expand the explanation.
Edoardo: that sounds very good. If you want to use the Oxford flood network as a use case I would be happy to share my insights.
Oliver: yes, that could be interesting, and I will arrange to call you to discuss it further.
If others are interested, we could make this into an open call and send invitations to the public list.
Oliver invites Edoardo to fill out the table and then have a call to discuss it.
Edoardo: that would be fine for me.
Oliver: we have a page on advanced concepts for security and privacy.
We kicked this off 4 or 5 weeks ago, but as far as I am aware there have been no changes over the last 2 weeks.
We have a joint work item with the discovery and provisioning task force on authorization for discovery.
Oliver: we are pretty much done with the agenda for this week, any other things to raise today?
Oliver closes the call for today.
This is scribe.perl Revision: 1.140 of Date: 2014-11-06 18:16:30 Check for newer version at http://dev.w3.org/cvsweb/~checkout~/2002/scribe/ Guessing input format: RRSAgent_Text_Format (score 1.00) Succeeded: s/disctinction/distinction/ Succeeded: s/invited/invites/ Found ScribeNick: dsr Inferring Scribes: dsr Present: Oliver_Pfaff Dave_Raggett Edoardo_Pignotti James_Lynn Joerg_Heuer Yingying_Chen arne Agenda: https://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-wot-ig/2015Sep/0033.html Got date from IRC log name: 17 Sep 2015 Guessing minutes URL: http://www.w3.org/2015/09/17-wot-sp-minutes.html People with action items: WARNING: Input appears to use implicit continuation lines. You may need the "-implicitContinuations" option.[End of scribe.perl diagnostic output]