Subject: Re: [secdir] Some observations that may be of interest

From: Hector Santos <[email-masked]>
Date: Mon, 9 Nov 2009 19:11:34 -0800 (PST)

On Nov 9, 12:05 pm, Alessandro Vesely <[email-masked]> wrote:
> Hector Santos wrote:

> There is a difference between sharing information and being battery
> farmed. However big that difference may seem, it is also subtle. I'm
> not sure how much the people are willing to discern between industry
> goals and their own, world's citizens goals. We need that distinction,
> for the sake of democracy. I think the Privacy Impact Assessment
> should be thoroughly carried out and result in policy recommendations
> aimed at enabling users to share what they deem correct, with no
> penalizations nor forcing.

+1, the concern I have is the level of vendor PIA compliance and will
there be a consumer choice?  I mean, its not like the customer really
has a choose in agreeing with a home energy TOS :)  Unless of course,
with the Smart Grid comes energy provider competition (Enron anyone?)
and collusion isn't an issue.

Catching up with some of IETF draft documents, what came to mind is
maybe a possible need to provide a set of Smart Grid Device (SGD)
design principles.  Half joking, I came up with:

First law of Smart Grid Dynamics:  Smart Grid Devices (SGD) must not
create nor consume more energy than it is designed to save or
optimize.

So if a vendor device is doing much more than it is required for
"Smart Grid",  this distinction can possible serve as a basis of
separation for PII (Persionally Identifable Information) user optional
feedback.  We might also wish to develop a way to measure the impact
of application level SGDs which might lead to:

Second law of Smart Grid Dynamics:  Smart Grid Devices (SGD) must not
create entropy in the network.

That might suggest to not be overzealous with message notification
ideas.

--
HLS

_______________________________________________
secdir mailing list
[email-masked]
https://mailman.mit.edu/mailman/listinfo/secdir