Christian Engström, Pirat

2 februari 2010

Internet of Things — Request For Comments

Filed under: English,informationspolitik,Internet of Things — Christian Engström @ 13:10

Internet of Things

”Internet of Things – An action plan for Europe” is the title of a communication from the EU Commission. There is a summary of the communication in the procedure page of the European Parliament, along with some more information.

The lead committee in the parliament for this proposal is the industrial committee ITRE, but the committee for the internal market IMCO, where I am a member, will also be submitting its comments on this proposal as an opinion.

So I throw the question open:

Do you have any comments that you think the committee should take into consideration? Is there anything interesting in this dossier? Anything controversial hiding in the shadows? Anything else that I and the committee should be aware of? Or is it just dull, dull, dull?

I look forward to reading any comments.

…………

Andra bloggar om: , , ,

Annonser

19 kommentarer

  1. My reading guide to this document:
    – The gray boxes are the relevant parts, the rest is mostly waffle/background.
    – Often it contains lists of words (actions, principles etc). Quite often the LAST in the list is the most relevant/controversial.
    – I read the word ”stakeholder” as someone with a monetary interest in something, i.e. a business.

    My summary of the most controversial points (in my opinion, and I tried to read it in a ‘paranoid’ fashion):

    —————————-

    Line of Action 1:
    – The Commision will define how the next generation of internet (IoT) is ruled.
    – The next generation of internet must be non-anonymous? (follows from the phrase ”architecture … so that public authorities can exercise their responsibilities as regards blah, blah and accountability” ? )

    Line of Action 2:
    I don’t know about the current rules for RFID, so I cannot judge these points. There is a mention about additional regulations in the last point, but not what kind of regulation.

    Line of Action 3:
    – The Commission wants to ”debate” the right to disconnect you/your devices from the net.
    For me this should be an absolute right, so I wonder why the debate…

    Line of Action 4:
    – ”Meet the challenges of trust, blah and acceptance”
    Is this newspeak for ”showing RFID down our throats”?
    Also I have a problem with all these positive sounding words. Trust, for whom? That the authorities can trust our chips, or that we can trust them? Same for ”security” etc.

    Line of Action 6:
    ”all interested parties” == the most rich corporations?
    ”discovery services” == ???

    Line of Action 7:
    ”software emulationg human reasoning and on novel applications” can be both good and bad. Too abstract to be judgeable.

    The rest of the LoA seems more waffly than concrete: some other LoA line out how IoT should be developed in cooperation with the US, and how the Center of Innovation and Enterprenourship should be involve etc.

    ——————————–

    /Werner

    Kommentar av Werner — 2 februari 2010 @ 14:48

  2. Hej, jag arbetar själv inom ett FP7 program, det heter Networking for communication challenged communities (N4C.eu). Det bygger mycket nästa generation internet-teknologi (DTN) och vi har många kompetenta medarbetare (Vint Cerf är med på technical board t.ex). Just nu bygger vi testbäddar i Slovenien och i svenska fjällen. Har dock problem hur man ska koppla ihop detta med informations-politik på ett bra sätt (Det sägs att 80% av världens befolkning inte har tillgång till Internet). Tips på paper?
    ————–
    Call for Papers

    Future Internet Symposium 2010: Towards a Converged, Consolidated and Sustainable Future Internet

    Berlin, September 20-22, 2010
    http://www.fis2010.org
    ————–

    Kommentar av jie^ — 2 februari 2010 @ 14:59

  3. Ordet som stör, redan i introduktionen, är ”proaktiv” vilket betyder att kommissionen vill lägga sig i den tekniska utvecklingen. Historien har visat få exempel där detta varit en lyckad väg. Tekniska framsteg genom politiska kommissioner är mycket ovanliga. Planen innehåller sedan allt möjligt ifrån rent praktiska aspekter på sophantering av använda RFID taggar till ”raising awareness” hos diverse politiska organ vilket gör det spretigt och, med all sannolikhet, omöjligt att genomföra. Tillbaks till ritbordet med andra ord och då ska man koncentrera sig på sådant som kommissionen faktiskt kan åstakomma som stöd till forskning och standardisering, skapandet av gemensamma regelverk för en öppen marknad och policies för datahantering, arkivering och radering.

    Kommentar av Mats Onnestam — 2 februari 2010 @ 17:35

  4. Hi!

    It’s important that all new standards in this area becomes easily and freely available to anyone and that example implementations are also freely available. When IETF is the standards body, this will be fulfilled. CEN and ITU typically charges significant sums of money for standards papers and reference implementations are typically not easily available. This is important in order to ensure a rapid, broad and flexible uptake of IoT by stimulating Open Source solutions (which is also good for European Industry). Looking back to the early days of the Internet one can only conclude that the fast, flexible and very public RFC system developed by IETF is one important reason why the Internet became so successful.

    Who will own and control the DNS system for IoT? In particular the root DNS. US government? This is discussed in a somewhat convoluted and polite manner on page 5, perhaps hiding the power in this issue. What will follow from ownership of the DNS system for IoT? Knowledge of all things around? Their status and position? Owner?

    That leads to the integrity issues; the individual should have the right to KNOW what devices (since this will not be obvious) that are or could become connected to IoT and should be able to control if and when that happens. That’s a couple of new things for the Internet Bill of Rights; http://internetbillofrights.wordpress.com

    Best Regards
    Peter

    Kommentar av Peter — 2 februari 2010 @ 20:14

  5. Min analys är följande:

    1. Ordet ”accountability” är scary. Vad menas? Jag tror att vad man försöker implicera här är att alla måste vara identifierbara på nätet, dvs nix anonymitet.

    2. Detta stycke är rätt talande: ”A prerequisite for trust and acceptance of these systems is that appropriate data protection measures are put in place against possible misuse and other personal data related risks.” Denna typ av problem löser man ju som ofta alldeles utmärkt med kryptering, och behöver inget stöd från kommissionen. Jag tror dock igen att man har annat i kikaren.

    3. Det känns lite som att man ska lagstifta fram tekniska lösningar, när de gott borde kunna lösas av individer och/eller företag själva. I och för sig vore det ju inget vidare om Microsoft köpte sig standarder, som de har visat sig mer och mer villiga att göra, men att lagstifta fram dem känns ännu sämre.

    4. Denna mening värmde mitt hjärta, så vi får hoppas att den betyder vad man tror: ”…IoT standards to be developed in an open, transparent and consensual manner with the participation of all interested parties.”

    5. ”allow … new systems to be deployed in parallel with existing systems without creating excessive burdens for market entry or other operational barriers, such as excessive licenses/fees or inappropriate intellectual property schemes” låter bra, men luktar som att man vill införa ett internet 2 (eller 3 eller nåt) där man bygger på annan teknik. Låter också lite scary. Många tycker att internet är anarki och nära kollaps. Jag tycker det är perfekt just nu. Visst, det finns spam och botnets och virus, men de är under kontroll, tycker jag. Denna mening låter som en upprening av den förra ”allow an adequate level of interoperability so that innovative and competitive cross-domain systems and applications can be developed”

    6. ”Line of action 10 — Institutional Awareness” hade jag gärna sett skriven som ”Line of action 10 — Institutional and Citizen Awareness”. För det är väl inte bara företag och institutioner som bör hållas ajour?

    7. Se för bövelen till att ”Line of action 11: International dialogue” sker öppet, med en mening liknande den som stod om standardisering, så att vi inte får något liknande ACTA.

    8. Samma sak gäller egentligen också ”Line of action 14 — Assessment of evolution”, så att detta sker öppet.

    Kommentar av Mats Henricson — 2 februari 2010 @ 21:24

  6. Christian; some comments:
    Line 1. The background here is that IoT enabled objects will have an IP address, and a DNS like system will be around to find them on the IoT net. An unknown here is what additioal info will be held in the DNS for IoT. Additionally they will most likely have an unique ID (similar to RFID) and some will offer additional services such as being able to sense their environment (temperature, pressure,…) and position; and the status of the object they are built into (such as some auto-part in your car or into your own heart muscle). Thus, the one that controls what objects are around, where they are and their status have access to some significant data. Google would love that; ad placement on steroids :-). We do want that control distributed in a fine granular manner. We do not want the us government to own that, nor the EU commission, nor FRA. Hence, the wording about an architecture and decentralization. But really, who should then own and control the root DNS? And any delegated domains? It MUST be a neutral trusted body. In Sweden it’s a society (stiftelse – having no owners and no members) http://www.iis.se that has the delegated responsibility for .se. In Europe RIPE has that delegated from the US. This is important to sort out for IoT.

    Kommentar av Peter Szmulik — 2 februari 2010 @ 21:27

  7. Att EU i rollen som kund eller samordnare ställer gemensamma krav på system för t ex säkrare infrastruktur är helt OK.
    Där IoT eller någon annan teknik kan vara en beståndsdel i lösningen.
    Men det är den enda roll som är legitim för EU.
    Annars riktas likt en ny bananböj återigen den politiserande klåfingrigheten till helt fel nivå.
    EU ska överhuvudtaget inte komma i kontakt med, göra politik av, eller försöka styra över hur man på en underliggande teknisk nivå löser ett problem.

    Kommentar av NilsK — 2 februari 2010 @ 23:43

  8. NilsK

    I stort enig men gör vi ingenting så kommer Dept. Commerce US Government att tillsammans med dagens DNS root server även äga IoT:s root server. Frågan kvarstår: vem ska äga den, för någon måste äga den.

    Kommentar av Peter Szmulik — 3 februari 2010 @ 12:17

  9. Big Bros. Benito & Bodstürm får ny orwellsk leksak…

    Siten Pusha och dess användare har glädjande nog betraktat mitt initiala mastodontinlägg om Glenn Rune Gallefoss vs Timbaland som ”hett”, med betydelsen att det ”pushats” en hel del vilket renderat en plats på sitens förstasida. Jag tar tacksamt……

    Trackback av Thomas Tvivlaren - Med tvivlet som insats — 3 februari 2010 @ 14:05

  10. […] månader sedan (jag tror vi alla minns ett par exempel). Det är så många olika människor som skapar så mycket positiva föredömen att negativa vibbar drunknar ut och att det roliga, positiva och […]

    Pingback av Islossning | Rick Falkvinge (PP) — 3 februari 2010 @ 16:11

  11. When can’t a european sue a MEP?

    Kommentar av ST — 4 februari 2010 @ 2:13

  12. I think it must be clear that no barriers should be put for a user to understand what really is in the RFID tags he buys with regular goods. There should be no law preventing reverse engineering or neutralization of these tags. It must be lawful also to monitor the communication of these tags at any moment.

    I know the EU will try to defend privacy rights in a ”centralized governance” manner but its missions would be greatly aided by the harnessing of individual efforts that already exist in the DIY community to protect one’s privacy. As the document mentions, companies using this often spans on several countries in and out of the EU borders. To track those that will voluntarily try to dodge legal obligations and to exploit loopholes, the harnessing of the international DIY community may be very precious.

    Kommentar av Yves Quemener — 5 februari 2010 @ 10:25

  13. Hi Christian,
    IoT for EU is alike the inventory for a merchant: Any (mobile) ressource will get a number even (EU-) citizens (ePass): Internet of >>Things<<. Fluids (water) will be the only things without address unless they're in a bottle. 😉
    While the things can't get rid of their addresses the merchant can look via internet where his things are.
    People already have their addresses and (ID) Numbers (social insurances, handy, finance/tax). But the merchant do not know where exactly he has to go to meet this ID at any time. If people buy things with RFID or other technical solution of monitoring, they can't be invisible even they let their ePass or Handy (etc.) at home. When they buy with credit card or money (with RFID inside) any usefull things you can monitor where these things are.
    This is just the beginning:
    http://blippy.com/
    The merchant know who bought it and where the things are. People become "glassy". If this kind of "world" already exist it is a computer game.
    ===
    The technological solutions for this scenario:
    "RFID, Near Field Communication(NFC), 2D bar codes, wireless Sensor/actuators, Internet Protocol Version 6 (IPv6) (NFC), 2D-Barcodes, drahtlose Sensor-/ Aktor, Internet Protocol Version 6 (IPv6), Ultra-wide-band or 3/4G, which are all expected to play an important role in future deployments."
    You have to be sure from whom you have to obtain the licence. In case of RFID I think it isn't that clear who owns the proper licence.
    ( http://translate.google.com/translate?hl=de&sl=de&tl=en&u=http%3A%2F%2F74.125.77.132%2Fsearch%3Fq%3Dcache%3A5EVBRo3ijuYJ%3Awww.informationweek.de%2Fnews%2FshowArticle.jhtml%253FarticleID%253D184420880%2BRFID%2Bpatent%26cd%3D3%26hl%3Dde%26ct%3Dclnk%26gl%3Dde%26client%3Dfirefox-a
    G. Cache and G. Translator you have to be quick to look at)
    ===
    Smoking under sixteen is prohibited. So every cigarette automat is equipped with a passport/card reader. When the ePass comes along these automats have to be upgraded to read RFID, too. If these can read RFID passports the teenager don't need a passport anymore. The youth just has to wait that an ePass of a grown up stands near the cigarette machine. RFID reader can have a huge rage, even if you modify it (producer/youngster):
    http://ww1.microchip.com/downloads/en/Market_Communication/optedn_ps.pdf
    By the way these machines can then log the mobile profile of each citizen who walks on by the different machines.
    ===
    And you have to take care as soon as power suply lines become intelligent:
    http://salzburg.orf.at/stories/421325/ or
    http://www.energy.gov/news2009/8305.htm
    Because you never underestimate "Hacker" who will enjoy getting into the systems or the human factor making bugs not features.
    ===
    The comment writer above: You never could be too "paranoia". For other men this is their reality. 😉
    ===
    PIRATES: The more data you request the more data can be misused. Avoid making (personal) data.

    Kommentar av Idee — 8 februari 2010 @ 12:50

  14. If everything becomes a RFID or such kind of solution you have to take care of the food chain. Dr. Kohl (Germanys Federal Chancellor a.D.) would be really surprised if he would find his pig’s stomach (local food delicacy) stiffed with RFIDs and stuff. Even the smallest change of nature might have the biggest effects.

    Kommentar av Idee — 11 februari 2010 @ 16:52

  15. If every thing is connected and the information will be transmitted fast there will be an incident you know right before it will take place. It’s like looking into the future living in the past thinking of the present. It’s not like 9/11: The planes crashed, the buildings were busted and everybody saw reality 1:1 on screen. IoT will indicate most events which will most likely occur. You have to imagine a chain reaktion but with IoT you have the survey and you even can interact from the beginning to the end. This is not only a strength but also its weakness while you can abuse it to have backlash for goverments/companies/persons or you can make money at Wall Street.

    IoT will have serious consequences to social (infra)structure. While things can be monitored anytime you know the whereabout of all humans. It’s not a nice game of handy tracking:
    http://www.themobiletracker.com/german/index.html
    or an INDECT project (besides the same FP7 program as IoT):
    http://www.indect-project.eu/.
    It is severe. Everybody can and will spy on each other (Persons/Family/company/..) and track him down even at home anytime. They will know when you go to toilet, take a shower/bath/tee/coffee, look TV/PC or use any other electrical device. Oh, sorry i’m mistaken… t h e y will tell you when you can use electrical (and water) devices because the power supply company will avoid current peaks in the future:
    http://www.energy.gov/news2009/8305.htm

    Kommentar av Idee — 12 februari 2010 @ 2:44

  16. […] or by other means, I don’t see very much that is controversial or interesting in this report. Please tell me if you disagree, and have found some aspect that is worth considering more in […]

    Pingback av On the Pirate agenda in Brussels « Christian Engström, Pirate MEP — 21 februari 2010 @ 20:53

  17. http://a-cell-phone.com/2010/02/13/sagem_orga_and_telefonica_turn_the_sim_circuit_board_into_a_wi_fi_hot_spot.html
    ”“If customers tin connect their notebooks to the Web anytime and anywhere by simply exploitation what they have with them most of the meter and what is the most trusted secure gimmick – the SIM circuit board – adoption can be expected to be enormous.””

    If customers can connect with their electronic tool (handy, notebook etc.) to the web anytime and anywhere, the developer have remote control to their SIM Fi card as well.

    This is just a step away from IoT. You just need a power supply to apply the SIM Fi card on things. Perhaps this can be a solution for some ”things”:
    http://appft.uspto.gov/netacgi/nph-Parser?Sect1=PTO2&Sect2=HITOFF&p=1&u=%2Fnetahtml%2FPTO%2Fsearch-bool.html&r=1&f=G&l=50&co1=AND&d=PG01&s1=20100045241.PGNR.&OS=DN/20100045241&RS=DN/20100045241
    You just have to shake your handy to excite energy with the ”piezoelectric elements”.
    Put the SIM Fi and the patentet sensor together and every mobile shaky thing is ready for the internet.

    Kommentar av Idee — 17 mars 2010 @ 0:54

  18. http://www.springerlink.com/content/pg22v52027263222/
    The Global Traceability Or How to Feel Like a UPS Package

    Citizens are things, too.

    http://www.springerlink.com/content/3j133333278u3x0j/
    E-Passport: Cracking Basic Access Control Keys

    The things aren’t sure at all.

    Kommentar av Idee — 21 juni 2010 @ 14:29

  19. http://arstechnica.com/science/news/2010/11/researchers-harvest-stress-and-vibrations-to-charge-tiny-devices.ars
    ”Everything from industrial equipment to the human body loses some of the energy it uses to things like heat and vibrations. The ability to harvest some of this energy is usually pretty limited, as small heat differences and weak movements are difficult to concentrate into significant amounts of useful energy. But even an inefficient conversion can be sufficient to provide power for small energy-efficient devices, such as medical implants and short-range transmitters, so researchers are working on developing materials that can convert environmental noise into small amounts of useful energy.”

    Kommentar av Idee — 11 november 2010 @ 14:26


RSS feed for comments on this post.

Blogga med WordPress.com.

%d bloggare gillar detta: