- DG-IDoT - mailman.kantarainitiative.org

[Action] Kantara plenary / IDoT DG meeting 10./11.Nov 2013
by Ingo.Friese＠telekom.de 29 Aug '13

29 Aug '13

Hi all, Kantara Initiative plans currently an Overall Plenary Event to be held 10th and 11th November 2013 in Vancouver (Canada) right after IETF. This is a great opportunity to meet as IDoT DG for the first time. I'd like to invite you to our first "IDoT" WG meeting! Let's work and discuss in our group as well as to sync up with other groups. It would be great if you could make it possible! So please give me a sign asap whether you are able to attend or rather not. It's enough when you say -yes- -no- -maybe-! Joni and Heather need this in order to plan rooms / agenda etc. Thank you! Kind regards, Ingo

1 0

IDoT telecon 2013-08-27
by Ingo.Friese＠telekom.de 27 Aug '13

27 Aug '13

Hi All, Our next IDoT-call is coming up. IDoT telecon minutes 2013-08-13 (draft) http://kantarainitiative.org/confluence/display/IDoT/IDoT+telecon+2013-08-13 Date and Time * Tuesday, August 27, at 9am PT (time chart)<http://www.timeanddate.com/worldclock/fixedtime.html?msg=IDoT+Conf+Call&iso…> * Voice: Skype: +99051000000481 or US +1-805-309-2350 / Alternate Toll +1 (714) 551-9842 (international dial-in lines<http://kantarainitiative.org/confluence/x/KYC_/>), room code 613-2898# * (Turbobridge call options<https://www.turbobridge.com/join.html>) Agenda * Roll call * Introduction * Organizational next steps * Action item review * IDoT use-case collection IDoT landscape discussion * AOB Ingo Friese Kind regards Ingo Friese Deutsche Telekom AG T-Labs (Research & Innovation) Dipl.-Ing. Ingo Friese Winterfeldtstr. 21, 10781 Berlin +4930835358148 (Phone) +49391580216849 (Fax) E-Mail: ingo.friese(a)telekom.de<mailto:ingo.friese@telekom.de> www.telekom.com<http://www.telekom.com/> Life is for sharing. DEUTSCHE TELEKOM AG Supervisory Board: Prof. Dr. Ulrich Lehner (Chairman) Board of Management: René Obermann (Chairman), Reinhard Clemens, Niek Jan van Damme, Timotheus Höttges, Dr. Thomas Kremer, Claudia Nemat, Prof. Dr. Marion Schick Commercial register: Amtsgericht Bonn HRB 6794 Registered office: Bonn Big changes start small - conserve resources by not printing every e-mail. _______________________________________________ DG-IDoT mailing list DG-IDoT(a)kantarainitiative.org<mailto:DG-IDoT@kantarainitiative.org> http://kantarainitiative.org/mailman/listinfo/dg-idot

1 0

Re: [DG-IDoT] IDoT use-case collection "rental car mobility" scenario by Ingo
by Ingo.Friese＠telekom.de 24 Aug '13

24 Aug '13

Hi Eve, Hi Colin, Without knowing all UMA details I have the feeling that UMA could work for many use-cases in the Internet of Things, e.g. in terms of authorization although the resource owner is not present; a standardized way to introduce the AM to the protected source; one AM per user/owner etc.. Ingo From: Eve Maler [mailto:eve@xmlgrrl.com] Sent: Montag, 19. August 2013 17:55 To: Colin Wallis; Friese, Ingo; dg-idot(a)kantarainitiative.org Subject: Re: [DG-IDoT] IDoT use-case collection "rental car mobility" scenario by Ingo Hi folks-- Responding from my personal email address... "OAuth for things" and granting access authorization to autonomous (no pun intended) third parties around access to devices are topics we've discussed a bit in the UMA group. You can see the discussion in our 2013-06-20 meeting notes<http://kantarainitiative.org/confluence/display/uma/UMA+telecon+2013-06-20> and also in the "Device Managed Access" email thread<http://kantarainitiative.org/pipermail/wg-uma/2013-June/thread.html>. What UMA's profile adds to OAuth's typical capabilities (wrt this topic, anyway) is to allow the resource owner to set the conditions of access ("policy") and then not have to be present or logged in to anything when a third-party requesting party comes along and attempts access. The choice of whether to treat a human being or the "thing" itself as the initial resource owner is an interesting philosophical/deployment-specific question. Eve On 19 Aug 2013, at 8:15 AM, "Maler, Eve" <emaler(a)forrester.com<mailto:emaler@forrester.com>> wrote: Eve Maler Forrester Research | Principal Analyst, Security & Risk | cell +1 425.345.6756 | @xmlgrrl | forr.com/evemaler<http://forr.com/evemaler> ---------- Forwarded message ---------- From: Colin Wallis <colin_wallis(a)hotmail.com<mailto:colin_wallis@hotmail.com>> Date: Thu, Aug 15, 2013 at 6:29 PM Subject: RE: [DG-IDoT] IDoT use-case collection "rental car mobility" scenario by Ingo To: "Ingo.Friese(a)telekom.de<mailto:Ingo.Friese@telekom.de>" <ingo.friese(a)telekom.de<mailto:ingo.friese@telekom.de>>, "dg-idot(a)kantarainitiative.org<mailto:dg-idot@kantarainitiative.org>" <dg-idot(a)kantarainitiative.org<mailto:dg-idot@kantarainitiative.org>>, Eve Maler <emaler(a)forrester.com<mailto:emaler@forrester.com>> Very very good use case Ingo. I can see why you cannot discuss Security and Privacy because there is no Authn or Authz baseline to build considerations for these. I went back to your links to the IETF work in your previous emails where I remember Authn and Authz mentioned. Not much there! More questions than anything.. But CoAP over DTLs/TLs was mentioned. ...and questions on whether OAuth could be refashioned into 'SASL and the GSS-API' ..which I guess is another way of getting to the same place you are suggesting with UMA (cc'ing Eve in here for a comment..) Cheers Colin ________________________________ From: Ingo.Friese(a)telekom.de<mailto:Ingo.Friese@telekom.de> To: dg-idot(a)kantarainitiative.org<mailto:dg-idot@kantarainitiative.org> Date: Thu, 15 Aug 2013 15:06:09 +0200 Subject: [DG-IDoT] IDoT use-case collection "rental car mobility" scenario by Ingo Dear all, Please find attached my first draft for one of my IDoT use-cases. Thoughts and comments are highly welcome. Ingo http://kantarainitiative.org/confluence/display/IDoT/Use+Case+Repository Scenario "Enhanced car mobility" draft (Ingo Friese) Intro A rental car company "Green&Blue cars"wants to sell mobility instead of just renting cars per hour/day. They want to start a new business: selling mobility. A customer buys mobility e.g. for three days. Everything is included e.g. fees for the parking houses (owned by a company "Berlin Parking") and costs for gas or energy taken from energy-stations (owned by a company "Berlin Green Energy"). Scenario Bob visits the city of Berlin. He goes to the counter of "Green&Blue cars" and buys 3 days of mobility. He signs the contract and gets the key for the car. Now he is driving through the city center and wants to stop for sightseeing. He drives to a "Berlin Parking" house. When he wants to leave the parking house after a while a sensor at the gate recognizes and authenticates the identity of his rental car. As both companies "Green&Blue cars" and "Berlin Parking" have some mutual agreement the gate opens. Bob recognizes that the battery of his car is low. The navigation system directs him to a "Berlin Green Energy" Station. When he arrives at the energy station his car is identitfied and authenticated. Bob loads the battery without any payment and goes on. More technical view >From the identity point of view we have several aspects here: Bob is crossing domains of different companies. All these companies may have chosen different solutions, protocols and address and authentication schemes to manage their items. Addressing/Discovery The gate of "Berlin Parking" has to communicate with Bob's car. At least in order to recognize "ok this car has a special contract so it's good to go". For communication we need communication endpoints/addresses for the gate and for the car. The endpoint for the gate could be: 10.0.0.78.88.9876.berlincenter.berlinparking.de<http://10.0.0.78.88.9876.berlincenter.berlinparking.de/> (mixed address...public & "Berlin Parking" specific address URL) The endpoint for the car is in fact an IMEI (International Mobile Station Equipment Identity) of a mobile build in GSM unit e.g. #490154203237518#. Other rental car companies use the car-id taken from the CAN-BUS System (widely used system in car industry). Both companies have their special address scheme. How to address items across different domains, namespaces and formats? (Extensible Resource Identifier OASIS XRI might be an approach....needs further discussion) Authentication Bob is able to load the battery of his car or he can get gasoline without direct payment. It is really important that only cars of "Green&blue car" company get their fuel or energy without extra payment. So the car has to authenticate itself against the energy station. How to provide authentication without Bob's interaction? May be its possible to find a special solution for "Green&blue car" but what if tomorrow other rental car companies want to join? Is there something like a general authentication scheme for things? Authorization "Green&blue car" is only allowed for gas up to a certain amount of money. How to authorize things? (OAuth for Things?...) Policies The rental car company "Green&blue car" is allowed to check the status, location and certain statistics at any time. "Berlin Green Energy" is allowed to check the location of Bobs car in order to direct him to the nearest Energy station. There has to be a policy management deciding who is allowed for what? I have the feeling we need an authorization framework here. (kind of UMA/OAuth thing?) _______________________________________________ DG-IDoT mailing list DG-IDoT(a)kantarainitiative.org<mailto:DG-IDoT@kantarainitiative.org> http://kantarainitiative.org/mailman/listinfo/dg-idot Eve Maler http://www.xmlgrrl.com/blog +1 425 345 6756 http://www.twitter.com/xmlgrrl

4 4

IDoT use case "Runaway dog"
by Ingo.Friese＠telekom.de 23 Aug '13

23 Aug '13

Hi, I'd like to give another use case today. I call it "The runaway dog". This use case might be controversial because it's about object ID's that are not direct connected to the internet. http://kantarainitiative.org/confluence/pages/viewpage.action?pageId=643909… Intro Today pets/animals are often tagged somehow. In Germany for example you can bring an RFID(?) tag under the skin of your cat or dog. The tag is registered at a private company (e.g. tasso.net) When the pet runs away and is found by someone it can be identified and brought back to its owner. The use case is not new and there are different solutions running already. But the idea is to re-use the tag also for plenty of other services if the owner agrees on. Government could use the tag for checking whether the pet has vaccination or whether the tax was paid. You can imagine a GEO fencing services for example or a kitty door: It just opens when the right cat wants to come in. Do you want to put another Chip inside your pet for every service? No instead we should reuse the first one. For re using the chip there are several side conditions: Authorization / Access control The owner needs to decide and technology to enforce who (which service) is able to use the chip of my cat? There might be many attributes / information linked to the chip (not necessarily stored on it). We need access control to this information. Mapping / Addressing If you have a web-service running and you want to deal with pet RFID chips your need a mapping. If you want to check the vaccination you take the number and ask a mapping/discovery service for the location of the database that knows more about it. Best Ingo

1 0

Proposed IoT Use Cases #2 and #3
by j stollman 19 Aug '13

19 Aug '13

Proposed Use Case #2 Sticking with the automobile theme, I am concerned about authorization to access data stored within a vehicles computer systems. As autos become smarter and more of them have built-in navigation and emergency communications systems, the data accumulating in these systems becomes increasingly personal. The data is of value to many parties. At a minimum these include the following: 1. the vehicle "owner" 1. who may need emergency assistance 2. who may want to look up some historical facts of his travel (distance traveled to a client site that may be reimbursable) 3. who may want to update the information when he replaces parts or performs maintenance 4. who may need to prove that he wasn't the driver when the car caused an accident or was used for criminal purposes 5. erase his personal driving data when the car is sold or junked 2. the mechanic 1. who may use the information for diagnostic purposes 2. who may update the information with parts replaced, maintenance performed, or accident information 3. the vehicle lessor (in case the vehicle is leased and not purchased) 1. who may bill by mileage 2. who may charge a premium for driving in certain areas (e.g., foreign countries) 4. the insurance company who may charge lower rates for safe driving behavior 5. a prospective second-hand buyer 1. who want to know both the driving history 2. the maintenance/repair history 3. the accident history 6. law enforcement 1. who may use the information to investigate an accident 2. who may use the information as evidence of negligent driving 3. who may use the information to track a vehicle 7. the auto manufacturer 1. who may use it to detect flaws 2. who may use it to improve future models 8. wrongdoers 1. who may use it to track down their victims. 2. may attempt to falsify the history to avoid insurance liability (e.g., in an accident) 3. may attempt to falsify the history to improve resale value 4. may attempt to falsify various information to disguise auto theft. Unlike Ingo's use case which appears only to require uniquely identifying a vehicle, this scenario requires selectively authorizing read and write access to a large amount of personal data by a variety of parties. Use Case #3 Electric refueling at a friend's house As electric cars become more common, the scenario is likely to evolve where Bob drives Carole's electric car to visit Alice. Once at Alice's house, he wants to recharge his vehicle using Alice's electric hookup. But he wants the bill for the electricity used for charging to go to his account, rather than hers. Currently, to do this would likely require having Alice go online to her account to tell the electricity supplier that all electricity going through the car charge for the next three hours should be charged to Bob. And Bob will have to go into his account to authorize the charges coming from Alice's charger. As we migrate towards IoT, it may be possible to make this transaction more automated. One obvious way is to allow the electric hookup to interrogate each car and change any charging to the registered owner of the vehicle. This would solve many problems. But in this case, it would mean that Carole would be charged for Bob's use of the electricity. Another option would be to use the scenario above, but allow for an override function. The system may default to charging Alice, but by entering a command (through some interface which might be a hardware switch), Bob could authenticate and direct the charges to his account or credit card. I don't consider this as interesting as Use Case #2. But it does involve true authentication, not just identification. Thank you. Jeff -- Jeff Stollman stollman.j(a)gmail.com 1 202.683.8699 Truth never triumphs — its opponents just die out. Science advances one funeral at a time. Max Planck

4 3

IoT platform use case
by Ingo.Friese＠telekom.de 19 Aug '13

19 Aug '13

Hi, I'd like to add another use-case. It's about a service or platform offering end-users to connect all their little sensor for temperature or humidity. With the help of the platform they can connect it with other people or app-provider could build up applications and logic on top of it. Simple example: If you are a farmer just buy one or more sensors (temperature, wind , rain)and connect to the weather platform and you will get access to weather data of all other farmers all over the country. So it's a kind of crowd weather forcast. IoT Platform use case A company "IDoT Systems" wants to set up a platform. "South-bound" users can connect all kind of sensors or actuators. "Northbound" users have their apps and solutions to control their sensors and actuators. The platform does access management, policies, persistence, protocol adaptions (if necessary) etc. in fact all classic middleware functions. (see picture below) Possible scenarios are: User buys a sensor/actuator and connects it to the "IDoT Systems" platform. With his app he can read and set current data. More advanced applications can combine data from different sensors and control complex processes e.g. in home automation or SME etc. A user can also open access to his sensors for other users at the platform or for the internet in general. Platform pre-conditions/pre-assumptions 1.) Today, devices and sensors speak a lot of different protocols, but most of them are not HTTP. We'll have many different solution, address schemes and protocols in parallel for a while. 2.) Although we should aim at HTTP RESTful architecture because its flexible, loosely coupled, scalable and lightweight. 3.) Furthermore we can utilize common Web technologies for IdM/Authentication/Autorization. 4.) Elements running with other protocols might be integrated via protocol gateways. With a look at this kind platform I see few issues to discuss or for further study: 1) Is it enough for a sensor to implement an OAuth interface? 2) UMA could be the right framework to assign and revoke rights for sensors/actuators? Every user could have an own authorization manager. With UMA we had also a standardized way to introduce new sensors to the platform. 3) The platform could manage XACML policies ending up in scopes for the actual OAuth request [cid:image001.png@01CE9CF5.FF20BFE0] Best, Ingo

2 1

IDoT use-case collection "rental car mobility" scenario by Ingo
by Ingo.Friese＠telekom.de 19 Aug '13

19 Aug '13

Dear all, Please find attached my first draft for one of my IDoT use-cases. Thoughts and comments are highly welcome. Ingo http://kantarainitiative.org/confluence/display/IDoT/Use+Case+Repository Scenario "Enhanced car mobility" draft (Ingo Friese) Intro A rental car company "Green&Blue cars"wants to sell mobility instead of just renting cars per hour/day. They want to start a new business: selling mobility. A customer buys mobility e.g. for three days. Everything is included e.g. fees for the parking houses (owned by a company "Berlin Parking") and costs for gas or energy taken from energy-stations (owned by a company "Berlin Green Energy"). Scenario Bob visits the city of Berlin. He goes to the counter of "Green&Blue cars" and buys 3 days of mobility. He signs the contract and gets the key for the car. Now he is driving through the city center and wants to stop for sightseeing. He drives to a "Berlin Parking" house. When he wants to leave the parking house after a while a sensor at the gate recognizes and authenticates the identity of his rental car. As both companies "Green&Blue cars" and "Berlin Parking" have some mutual agreement the gate opens. Bob recognizes that the battery of his car is low. The navigation system directs him to a "Berlin Green Energy" Station. When he arrives at the energy station his car is identitfied and authenticated. Bob loads the battery without any payment and goes on. More technical view >From the identity point of view we have several aspects here: Bob is crossing domains of different companies. All these companies may have chosen different solutions, protocols and address and authentication schemes to manage their items. Addressing/Discovery The gate of "Berlin Parking" has to communicate with Bob's car. At least in order to recognize "ok this car has a special contract so it's good to go". For communication we need communication endpoints/addresses for the gate and for the car. The endpoint for the gate could be: 10.0.0.78.88.9876.berlincenter.berlinparking.de (mixed address...public & "Berlin Parking" specific address URL) The endpoint for the car is in fact an IMEI (International Mobile Station Equipment Identity) of a mobile build in GSM unit e.g. #490154203237518#. Other rental car companies use the car-id taken from the CAN-BUS System (widely used system in car industry). Both companies have their special address scheme. How to address items across different domains, namespaces and formats? (Extensible Resource Identifier OASIS XRI might be an approach....needs further discussion) Authentication Bob is able to load the battery of his car or he can get gasoline without direct payment. It is really important that only cars of "Green&blue car" company get their fuel or energy without extra payment. So the car has to authenticate itself against the energy station. How to provide authentication without Bob's interaction? May be its possible to find a special solution for "Green&blue car" but what if tomorrow other rental car companies want to join? Is there something like a general authentication scheme for things? Authorization "Green&blue car" is only allowed for gas up to a certain amount of money. How to authorize things? (OAuth for Things?...) Policies The rental car company "Green&blue car" is allowed to check the status, location and certain statistics at any time. "Berlin Green Energy" is allowed to check the location of Bobs car in order to direct him to the nearest Energy station. There has to be a policy management deciding who is allowed for what? I have the feeling we need an authorization framework here. (kind of UMA/OAuth thing?)

5 7

IoT "Object IdM managed appliance and servicing registration, authentication, and authorization" by Frank Mildner
by Ingo.Friese＠telekom.de 19 Aug '13

19 Aug '13

Hi, Frank asked me to send his use case to the list as he is not available this and next week. Best Ingo Use case: "Object IdM managed appliance and servicing registration, authentication, and authorization" Discussion >From a business and security perspective, major features of self-servicing appliances need to provide transparent identification and seamless authentication of the appliance to web services and transparent identification and seamless authentication of web services to the appliance on behalf of the owner of the appliance and on behalf of the service team without additional owner or service team intervention. Pre-requisites: A user has purchased a household appliance (e.g. air condition, refrigerator, washing machine, etc.) including a subscription for self-servicing. Appliance is registered on an Object IdP by its owner, manufacturer, vendor service team or on its own(?). The servicing web service is registered on an Object IdP by its owner, manufacturer, vendor service team or on its own(?) Service processes The diagnostics application in the appliance realizes / analyzes the malfunctioning of a part or the changing values (e.g temperature, pressure, etc.). The m2m device in the appliance initiates an alarming call/message to the web service. So as to access the web service and get an access, based on the communication roles and security roles, the appliance starts an authentication on the Object-IdP. Based on its identity and credentials the appliance receive an access token from the IdP and use the token to grant access to the servicing web-service to assure its identity in order to book an additional remote diagnostic or a service technician and ensure thereby misuse of servicing or vice versa avoid a compromise of the appliance. Requirements and open issues The Object IdP shall support the management of appliance registration, authentication authorization. The Object IdP shall support the management of web service registration, authentication authorization. The Object IdP shall support the management of token validation What is the identity of the appliance? Who is the owner of the appliance identity? How identity representation (addresses, serial numbers...) can be matched/mapped to the "actual" Identity of Things? And what is the "actual" Identity of Things? (e.g. GS1 claims the be the IoT namespace)

1 0

draft minutes of IDoT telecon 2013-08-13
by Ingo.Friese＠telekom.de 19 Aug '13

19 Aug '13

IDoT telecon 2013-08-13 (draft) http://kantarainitiative.org/confluence/display/IDoT/IDoT+telecon+2013-08-13 Date and Time * Tuesday, August 13, at 9am PT (time chart)<http://www.timeanddate.com/worldclock/fixedtime.html?msg=IDoT+Conf+Call&iso…> * Voice: Skype: +99051000000481 or US +1-805-309-2350 / Alternate Toll +1 (714) 551-9842 (international dial-in lines<http://kantarainitiative.org/confluence/x/KYC_/>), room code 613-2898# * (Turbobridge call options<https://www.turbobridge.com/join.html>) Agenda * Roll call * Introduction * Discussing telecon time / possible group meeting * Organizational next steps * Action item review * IDoT use-case collection * AOB * Minutes Action item review no items to review Telecon time / possible group meeting We decided to keep the timeslot as long as there are no objections from group members. If you have an issue with the time slot and you want to take part please let us know. A meeting opportunity could be the upcoming KI plenary in November co-located to the IETF-Meeting in Vancouver. Other suggestions are welcome. IDoT Use case collection We decided to collect use-cases and scenarios to highlight Identify issues in the Internet of Things. Then we can sort out and group common problems and issues. As a first step we'd like to encourage all our group members to provide use cases and scenarios taken from their working environment or their experiences in life. For the beginning there is not much restriction. The description could be a half pager or up to several pages. Colin was as friendly as to create a directory<http://kantarainitiative.org/confluence/display/IDoT/Use+Case+Repository/> where you can put your description. But you should also send it to the list. Attendees * Andrew Nash * Benoit Bailleux * Colin Wallis * Frank Mildner * Ingo Friese * Jeff Stollmann * Sal D'agostino Next Meetings Telecon: Tuesday, August 27, at 9am PT (time chart)<http://www.timeanddate.com/worldclock/fixedtime.html?msg=IDoT+Conf+Call&iso…> Ingo Friese Kind regards Ingo Friese Deutsche Telekom AG T-Labs (Research & Innovation) Dipl.-Ing. Ingo Friese Winterfeldtstr. 21, 10781 Berlin +4930835358148 (Phone) +49391580216849 (Fax) E-Mail: ingo.friese(a)telekom.de www.telekom.com<http://www.telekom.com/> Life is for sharing. DEUTSCHE TELEKOM AG Supervisory Board: Prof. Dr. Ulrich Lehner (Chairman) Board of Management: René Obermann (Chairman), Reinhard Clemens, Niek Jan van Damme, Timotheus Höttges, Dr. Thomas Kremer, Claudia Nemat, Prof. Dr. Marion Schick Commercial register: Amtsgericht Bonn HRB 6794 Registered office: Bonn Big changes start small - conserve resources by not printing every e-mail.

2 3

SNMP MIB standardization
by Salvatore D'Agostino 15 Aug '13

15 Aug '13

Hi all, Look forward to group. Thought this might be of interest. http://newsmanager.commpartners.com/sianews/issues/2013-08-09/4.html I will be active in this. Regards, Sal Salvatore D'Agostino, CSCIP IDmachines LLC |1264 Beacon Street, #5 | Brookline, MA 02446 | USA http:\\www.idmachines.com <http://www.idmachines.com/> | http:\\idmachines.blogspot.com <http://idmachines.blogspot.com/> | @idmachines +1 617.201.4809 ph | +1 617.812.6495 fax

2 1