<map version="0.7.1">
<node TEXT="iTrust Workshop, Dortmund&#xa;6-9 October 2004">
<node TEXT="Law" FOLDED="true" POSITION="right">
<node TEXT="Trust and Financial services" FOLDED="true">
<node TEXT="Olav Torvund"/>
<node TEXT="Financial sector">
<node TEXT="1000&apos;s of banks"/>
<node TEXT="Sophisticated users of IT">
<node TEXT="Info-only services"/>
</node>
<node TEXT="Can be viewed as networked organization"/>
<node TEXT="What is value of VISA?">
<node TEXT="The network?"/>
</node>
</node>
<node TEXT="Trust?">
<node TEXT="Subjective"/>
<node TEXT="Some people trust George W?"/>
<node TEXT="Law is about reasons to trust">
<node TEXT="If we trust the system"/>
<node TEXT="and trust the lawyers"/>
</node>
<node TEXT="Belief, tradition, reputation and marketing"/>
<node TEXT="Long time to establish, no time to destroy">
<edge WIDTH="thin"/>
<font NAME="SansSerif" SIZE="12"/>
</node>
</node>
<node TEXT="Building trust">
<node TEXT="Identify risks"/>
<node TEXT="Evaluate risk">
<node TEXT="Probablility"/>
<node TEXT="Consequences"/>
<node TEXT="Reputation"/>
</node>
<node TEXT="Address the risk">
<node TEXT="(too many offload onto customers)"/>
</node>
</node>
<node TEXT="What&apos;s at risk?">
<node TEXT="Money"/>
<node TEXT="Reputation"/>
<node TEXT="Privacy"/>
<node TEXT="House">
<node TEXT="(status quo?)"/>
</node>
<node TEXT="Health"/>
<node TEXT="Life"/>
<node TEXT="(time, hassle?)"/>
</node>
<node TEXT="For financial services">
<node TEXT="Only money at risk"/>
<node TEXT="May be better to compensate than prevent"/>
<node TEXT="Reputation is also important"/>
<node TEXT="Cannot compensate life &amp; personal injury">
<node TEXT="cf. Pinto"/>
</node>
</node>
<node TEXT="40 years ago">
<node TEXT="Banks wanted our money"/>
<node TEXT="Convince us to use cheques"/>
<node TEXT="Why should a merchant trust?">
<node TEXT="Bank has no obligation to pay"/>
<node TEXT="Guarantees"/>
</node>
</node>
<node TEXT="20 years ago">
<node TEXT="Norway moving to paperless security"/>
<node TEXT="Paper we could see..."/>
<node TEXT="How to convince market paperless was reliable?">
<node TEXT="Strict liability"/>
<node TEXT="But can they pay?"/>
<node TEXT="Insurance"/>
<node TEXT="Joint unlimited guarantees"/>
</node>
</node>
<node TEXT="Double speak">
<node TEXT="&quot;Trust us&quot;, but we don&apos;t accept liability"/>
</node>
<node TEXT="Barclays 1985">
<node TEXT="B2C electronic comm new"/>
<node TEXT="No common disclaimers: &quot;we trust us&quot;"/>
</node>
<node TEXT=" Can we trust banks">
<node TEXT="Risk management">
<node TEXT="(e.g. in EU law)"/>
<node TEXT="Minmum capital req?"/>
<node TEXT="Maximum exposure to single customer"/>
<node TEXT="Supervision"/>
<node TEXT="Internal control"/>
<node TEXT="Deposit insurance"/>
</node>
</node>
<node TEXT="Lamfalussy principles - operational risks (BIS)"/>
<node TEXT="Netting">
<node TEXT="Inter-bank via central bank"/>
<node TEXT="Net position settlement on daily basis"/>
<node TEXT="Large transactions settled in real time" FOLDED="true">
<node TEXT="0.1% volume = 90%  value"/>
</node>
<node TEXT="Multilateral netting">
<node TEXT="Nett nett (across multiple parties)"/>
</node>
<node TEXT="Juristiction"/>
<node TEXT="Liquidity"/>
<node TEXT="Incentive and capability"/>
<node TEXT="Limits on credit exposure"/>
</node>
<node TEXT="Systemic risk">
<node TEXT="One failure cascades"/>
<node TEXT="Lamfalussy IV"/>
<node TEXT="Bank of New York, Bonn market, computer problems, (19 years ago?)">
<node TEXT="15Bn overdraft"/>
<node TEXT="Threatened financing of US budget deficit"/>
</node>
</node>
<node TEXT="Rating systems">
<node TEXT="Third party expert"/>
<node TEXT="Customer / user rating"/>
</node>
<node TEXT="Classic fraud">
<node TEXT="New player"/>
<node TEXT="Act serious for a while"/>
<node TEXT="Someone enters high value transaction"/>
<node TEXT="Take the money and run"/>
</node>
<node TEXT="Evidence">
<node TEXT="Access control no evidential security"/>
<node TEXT="We may need to be able to prove misdeed"/>
<node TEXT="Assume access control works"/>
</node>
<node TEXT="Summary">
<node TEXT="Sound reasons to trust"/>
<node TEXT="..."/>
</node>
</node>
<node TEXT="IPR helpline" FOLDED="true">
<node TEXT="See handouts"/>
<node TEXT="Chaos computer club vs Phographic industry">
<node TEXT="(Or: US big business vs everyone else?)"/>
</node>
<node TEXT="Discussion of &quot;trust&quot; and copyrights and security."/>
<node TEXT="Cannot circumvent DRM in EU law: now !?!">
<node TEXT="EU law relates more specifically to copy control"/>
<node TEXT="Debate about doing so for private use"/>
</node>
<node TEXT="&quot;Trusted computing&quot; you can&apos;t trust?"/>
<node TEXT="It&apos;s an ideological issue">
<icon BUILTIN="password"/>
<node TEXT="(so is it being worked out in the right forum?)"/>
<node TEXT="Increasingly impossible to use data without copying it"/>
<node TEXT="The right to control copying becomes the right to control access">
<icon BUILTIN="idea"/>
</node>
</node>
<node TEXT="Simon Shiu asks about history of successful laws"/>
<node TEXT="Privacy"/>
</node>
<node TEXT="Reputation system and data protection" FOLDED="true">
<node TEXT="Tobias Mahler, Oslo"/>
<node TEXT="Reputation systems">
<node TEXT="Communicate evlauation of conduct of subject"/>
<node TEXT="Used in decisions about subject"/>
<node TEXT="Encourage participation by enhancing trust"/>
<node TEXT="Incentive for compliance with obligations"/>
<node TEXT="Supplement national legislative domains"/>
</node>
<node TEXT="Concerns">
<node TEXT="User: can I trust the reputation system"/>
<node TEXT="User: can I trust the users (who judges?)"/>
<node TEXT="Decision maker: can I trust the data in the system? (data quality)"/>
</node>
<node TEXT="Data protection law provides some answers">
<node TEXT="Fair processing"/>
<node TEXT="???"/>
</node>
<node TEXT="Correlate" FOLDED="true">
<node TEXT="Principles of data protection law"/>
<node TEXT="Reputation systems">
<node TEXT="Consent">
<node TEXT="Freely given"/>
<node TEXT="Specific"/>
<node TEXT="Informed"/>
</node>
<node TEXT="Identity management">
<node TEXT="Real world or pseudonym"/>
<node TEXT="Personal if:">
<node TEXT="Data about"/>
<node TEXT="Identified person"/>
<node TEXT="Person is identifiable"/>
</node>
</node>
<node TEXT="Reputation profiles">
<node TEXT="Facts">
<node TEXT="Rules of collection"/>
<node TEXT="What is collected"/>
<node TEXT="What purposes"/>
<node TEXT="Data quality"/>
</node>
<node TEXT="Evaluations/opinions">
<node TEXT="Still personal data"/>
<node TEXT="rectify an opinion?"/>
<node TEXT="cross-comment"/>
<node TEXT="(opinions; state what you would change?)"/>
</node>
</node>
<node TEXT="Disclosure properties">
<node TEXT="Principle of restricted"/>
<node TEXT="Require consent?"/>
</node>
</node>
<node TEXT="Principles">
<node TEXT="Fair "/>
<node TEXT="Purpose"/>
<node TEXT="Minimality"/>
<node TEXT="Information quality"/>
<node TEXT="Data subject participation"/>
<node TEXT="Disclosure limitation"/>
<node TEXT="Special rules for sensitive data"/>
</node>
</node>
<node TEXT="Data protection law">
<node TEXT="Personal data"/>
<node TEXT="Other data is out of scope"/>
<node TEXT="But corporations have similar interests"/>
<node TEXT="Sources">
<node TEXT="Directives"/>
<node TEXT="National laws"/>
<node TEXT="Principles that transcend these"/>
</node>
</node>
<node TEXT="Conclusion">
<node TEXT="Reputation systems can be usefully informed by data protection laws."/>
<node TEXT="Corporations can be included"/>
</node>
<node TEXT="Question from floor">
<node TEXT="Difference between professional service vs amateur rating system?"/>
</node>
</node>
<node TEXT="Legal Risk Analysis and reputation systems" FOLDED="true">
<node TEXT="Frederik Vraalsen, SINTEF ICT, Oslo"/>
<node TEXT="Conventional legal anlsis focuses on legal requirements and consequences "/>
<node TEXT="Want to incorporate legal analysis into bigger picture"/>
<node TEXT="Model based risk analysis">
<node TEXT="Analysis has target, in context of organization"/>
<node TEXT="Asset - having value"/>
<node TEXT="Threat"/>
<node TEXT="Vulnerabity"/>
<node TEXT="Unwanted incident"/>
<node TEXT="Frequency"/>
<node TEXT="Effect"/>
<node TEXT="Treatment"/>
<node TEXT="(from CORAS)">
<node TEXT="Uses elements of UML"/>
<node TEXT="(mis-use-case diagram)">
<icon BUILTIN="ksmiletris"/>
</node>
</node>
</node>
<node TEXT="Applies MBRA to legal issues">
<node TEXT="Legal assets"/>
<node TEXT="Legal risks/vulnerabilities"/>
<node TEXT="Adverse legal findings"/>
<node TEXT="Media exposure of negative judgement"/>
</node>
<node TEXT="Laws and regulations can be viewed as threats, also as treatments"/>
<node TEXT="Existence of legal framework may enable business interaction"/>
<node TEXT="Is this trust?"/>
<node TEXT="Consider trust in service vs trust in subject"/>
</node>
<node TEXT="My comments">
<node TEXT="Daniel Weitzner (W3C lawyer)">
<node TEXT="Transparency paradox:"/>
</node>
</node>
</node>
<node TEXT="Social Science" FOLDED="true" POSITION="right">
<node TEXT="A socio-cognitive model of trust" FOLDED="true">
<node TEXT="Rino Falcone, ICST, Italy"/>
<node TEXT="(Also speaking for Christiano Castelfranchi)"/>
<node TEXT="Part of ALPHABiiTE"/>
<node TEXT="Introduction to trust" FOLDED="true">
<node TEXT="Many definitions.">
<node TEXT="Bond of society"/>
<node TEXT="Willingness to be vulnerable..."/>
<node TEXT="Subjective probability ..."/>
<node TEXT="3 expectations... order, performance, fulfilment of obligations"/>
</node>
<node TEXT="Trust helps agents cope in social environment "/>
<node TEXT="How do humans deal with trust problems?"/>
<node TEXT="What is new in new (computing) environment?">
<node TEXT="identification"/>
<node TEXT="perception"/>
<node TEXT="space-temporal context"/>
<node TEXT="authorities and guarantees"/>
<node TEXT="nature of interaction"/>
<node TEXT="rules of collaboration"/>
</node>
<node TEXT="Approaches">
<node TEXT="Gane theoretic"/>
<node TEXT="Security"/>
<node TEXT="Modal logics"/>
<node TEXT="Other operational"/>
<node TEXT="Socio-cognitive"/>
</node>
<node TEXT="Ambiguous">
<node TEXT="Simple evaluation (disposition)"/>
<node TEXT="...?"/>
</node>
</node>
<node TEXT="Socio-cognitive model static" FOLDED="true">
<node TEXT="Basic theory in terms of necessary mental states and decision to delegate"/>
<node TEXT="&quot;cold&quot; model, i.e. rational only">
<node TEXT="no emotional/affective component"/>
</node>
<node TEXT="Assumptions">
<node TEXT="Only a cognitive agent can trust"/>
<node TEXT="Mental attitude"/>
<node TEXT="only w.r.t. goal"/>
</node>
<node TEXT="beliefs">
<node TEXT="competence">
<node TEXT="know-how"/>
<node TEXT="self confidence"/>
<node TEXT="ability"/>
</node>
<node TEXT="availability/willingness">
<node TEXT="intents">
<node TEXT="motivation"/>
<node TEXT="morality"/>
<node TEXT="fear of authority"/>
</node>
</node>
<node TEXT="unharmfulness">
<node TEXT="goodwill"/>
<node TEXT="safety"/>
<node TEXT="..."/>
</node>
<node TEXT="dependence">
<node TEXT="X depends on Y"/>
<node TEXT="X beliefs about self">
<node TEXT="motivation"/>
<node TEXT="ability"/>
<node TEXT="..."/>
</node>
<node TEXT="X needs Y (strong)"/>
<node TEXT="X assisted by Y (weak)"/>
</node>
<node TEXT="environment">
<node TEXT="opportunities"/>
<node TEXT="adversities"/>
</node>
<node TEXT="(internal, external trust...?)">
<node TEXT="different agents mightbelieve differently"/>
<node TEXT="differant (rational) agents believe same?"/>
</node>
</node>
<node TEXT="Decision to trust -&gt; delegation"/>
</node>
<node TEXT="Socio-cognitive model dynamic" FOLDED="true">
<node TEXT="Agents for change">
<node TEXT="direct experience">
<node TEXT="increasing trust"/>
<node TEXT="past facts _can_ be interpreted causally"/>
</node>
<node TEXT="change sources"/>
<node TEXT="change risks of delegation"/>
<node TEXT="change emotional state"/>
<node TEXT="modification of environment"/>
</node>
<node TEXT="Classical view">
<node TEXT="success -&gt; increase trust"/>
<node TEXT="failure -&gt; reduce trust"/>
<node TEXT="begs determination of success/failure"/>
</node>
<node TEXT="Better view">
<node TEXT="modelling trust as simple index is unreasonable"/>
<node TEXT="reasons for success/failure">
<node TEXT="internal"/>
<node TEXT="external"/>
<node TEXT="occasional">
<node TEXT="maybe hold trust constant?"/>
<node TEXT="be alert to similar circumstances"/>
</node>
<node TEXT="stable/persistent"/>
</node>
</node>
<node TEXT="Endogynous factors">
<node TEXT="Trust itself can influence trust"/>
<node TEXT="e.g. A trusting B increases B trusting A"/>
<node TEXT="Awareness of belief may affect behaviour"/>
<node TEXT="Some complex logical expressions here"/>
<node TEXT="Trustworthiness"/>
<node TEXT="Weak delegation; A exploits existing action of B"/>
<node TEXT="Trustworthiness may change in response to belief/trust"/>
</node>
<node TEXT="Strong delegation"/>
</node>
<node TEXT="Questions/comments" FOLDED="true">
<node TEXT="Computationa model?">
<node TEXT="Must try"/>
</node>
<node TEXT="Organizations as cognitive agents">
<node TEXT="Some functions may correspond"/>
</node>
<node TEXT="Validation">
<node TEXT="Simukation w/fuzzy cognitive maps"/>
<node TEXT="Pshych experiments not enough?"/>
</node>
</node>
</node>
</node>
<node TEXT="Philosophy" POSITION="right"/>
<node TEXT="Computer Science" FOLDED="true" POSITION="right">
<node TEXT="Trust and Credential-based &#xa;Access Control" FOLDED="true">
<node TEXT="Joachim Biskup, Dortmund"/>
<node TEXT="Security, access control, monitoring and crypto"/>
<node TEXT="Centralized system assumptions" FOLDED="true">
<node TEXT="Known identities"/>
<node TEXT="Known observable properties"/>
<node TEXT="Secure channel to kernel"/>
<node TEXT="Trust established out-of-band"/>
</node>
<node TEXT="Real worls hidden, virtual wordl visible"/>
<node TEXT="Link document world/real world" FOLDED="true">
<node TEXT="Document semantics"/>
<node TEXT="Presumed correspondence"/>
<node TEXT="Keys proxy real identities">
<node TEXT="Public keys for encryption"/>
<node TEXT="Public keys for verification"/>
</node>
</node>
<node TEXT="Approach" FOLDED="true">
<node TEXT="Issue &quot;free&quot; properties"/>
<node TEXT="Bound properties for service access"/>
<node TEXT="Converting free properties to bound"/>
</node>
<node TEXT="Checking free properties" FOLDED="true">
<node TEXT="Check signature"/>
<node TEXT="Decide if issuer is trusted"/>
</node>
<node TEXT="Granting bound properties" FOLDED="true">
<node TEXT="One agent can grant"/>
<node TEXT="Same or other agend can verify &amp; allow access"/>
<node TEXT="Grant can be re-assessed at point of access"/>
</node>
<node TEXT="Trust" FOLDED="true">
<node TEXT="Trust to access (central model)"/>
<node TEXT="Trust to delegate"/>
<node TEXT="Certifying authority for signatures"/>
<node TEXT="Binding real-world identity to key">
<node TEXT="Trusted computing"/>
<node TEXT="Biometrics"/>
</node>
<node TEXT="Revocation, reconformation, one-time identities"/>
<node TEXT="Negative free properties"/>
</node>
<node TEXT="(Simon)">
<node TEXT="Identity-based &lt;foo&gt;:  key binding occurs later"/>
</node>
</node>
<node TEXT="Trust-based responsibility assignment" FOLDED="true">
<node TEXT="Renaud de Landtsheer, U Louvain, Belgium"/>
<node TEXT="Requirements engineering">
<node TEXT="Why?">
<node TEXT="Goals"/>
</node>
<node TEXT="What?">
<node TEXT="Requirements and assumptions"/>
</node>
<node TEXT="Agents"/>
</node>
<node TEXT="Responsibility assignment">
<node TEXT="How to ensure agents fulfil requirements"/>
<node TEXT="Use trust analysis in assignment of responsibilities"/>
</node>
<node TEXT="Logical construction: decomposition into conjuncts and temporal modal &quot;consequence&quot;?"/>
<node TEXT="Maybe use DL reasoners to evaluate these models?">
<icon BUILTIN="idea"/>
</node>
</node>
<node TEXT="Modelling Trust Certificates with missing CAs" FOLDED="true">
<node TEXT="Tomas Olsson, Swedish Institute of Computer Science"/>
<node TEXT="(misleading title)">
<node TEXT="&quot;Modelling trust with incomplete certificates&quot;?"/>
</node>
<node TEXT="Access control">
<node TEXT="Decentralized">
<node TEXT="Certification"/>
<node TEXT="Delegation -&gt; cert chains"/>
</node>
<node TEXT="Distributed">
<node TEXT="P2P">
<node TEXT="Resource owners"/>
<node TEXT="PDP (decision pts)"/>
</node>
<node TEXT="No central store"/>
</node>
<node TEXT="Dynamic">
<node TEXT="Peers come and go"/>
</node>
</node>
<node COLOR="#338800" TEXT="Trust if..">
<node TEXT="At time t"/>
<node TEXT="If verified by chain to SOA"/>
<node TEXT="Not revoked at time t"/>
</node>
<node TEXT="Boolean vs continuous"/>
<node TEXT="Situations">
<node TEXT="No historical info"/>
<node TEXT="Old information about cert validity"/>
<node TEXT="Current info"/>
<node TEXT="Info from other peers"/>
<node TEXT="Combination of info">
<node TEXT="Simple Bayes not good"/>
</node>
</node>
<node TEXT="Looking for trustworthy patterns"/>
<node TEXT="Cert:">
<node TEXT="Issuer"/>
<node TEXT="Type"/>
<node TEXT="Service"/>
<node TEXT="Time of validity"/>
<node TEXT="Status of verification"/>
</node>
<node TEXT="Data from PDP"/>
<node TEXT="Stuff about Bayesian inference"/>
<node TEXT="Add Markov chain modelling for probablility of revocation"/>
</node>
<node TEXT="Trust Management Approaches&#xa;and application to collaborative&#xa;business processes" FOLDED="true">
<node TEXT="Yucel Karablut, SAP, Germany"/>
<node TEXT="Virtual organizations">
<node TEXT="SIngle DB&#xa;-&gt;Distributed process&#xa;-&gt;Collab process&#xa;-&gt;Transient collab proc"/>
</node>
<node TEXT="TrustCom">
<node TEXT="Trust issues in VOs"/>
<node TEXT="Matrix: phases vs topic">
<node TEXT="Identification, Formation, Operation, Dissolution"/>
<node TEXT="Trust&amp;security, Contract, Collaborative process"/>
</node>
</node>
<node TEXT="Does motivating example..."/>
<node TEXT="Something about &quot;Property Conversions&quot; at the core of establishing trust"/>
<node TEXT="Hybrid PKI"/>
<node TEXT="Uses free/bound properties.">
<node TEXT="Free property can be, e.g., a 3rd party certification&#xa;as a qualified supplier, not related to any specific&#xa;service offereing.  cf. U Dortmund presentation."/>
</node>
</node>
<node TEXT="TuBE - trust based on evidence" FOLDED="true">
<node TEXT="Lea Viljanen, U Helsinki"/>
<node TEXT="New project"/>
<node TEXT="The problem...">
<node TEXT="Organization must for trust relationships"/>
<node TEXT="Creates explicit or implicit communities"/>
<node TEXT="Current security; preconfigured trust relationships"/>
<node TEXT="How to deal with events that compromise trust?"/>
<node TEXT="Need to allow trust relationship to evolve while interaction proceeds"/>
</node>
<node TEXT="Trust">
<node TEXT="People">
<node TEXT="Identify party"/>
<node TEXT="Decide trust"/>
<node TEXT="Watch behaviour"/>
</node>
<node TEXT="Systems">
<node TEXT="Authentication"/>
<node TEXT="Authorization"/>
<node TEXT="Anomaly detection"/>
</node>
<node TEXT="Model">
<node TEXT="Trustor and trustee identification"/>
<node TEXT="Requested action"/>
<node TEXT="Trustee reputation"/>
<node TEXT="Trustor context">
<node TEXT="e.g. under DoS?"/>
</node>
<node TEXT="Action risk"/>
<node TEXT="Action importance"/>
</node>
<node TEXT="Key factors">
<node TEXT="Trustor"/>
<node TEXT="Trustee"/>
<node TEXT="Action"/>
</node>
</node>
<node TEXT="Architecture"/>
<node TEXT="Long term goals: trust in communities">
<node TEXT="First, need to deal with some lower level issues"/>
<node TEXT="Link trust to intrusion detection and prevention"/>
</node>
</node>
</node>
<node TEXT="Project presentations" FOLDED="true" POSITION="right">
<node TEXT="TrustCom" FOLDED="true">
<node TEXT="Virtual organizations">
<icon BUILTIN="help"/>
</node>
<node TEXT="Business Collaboration"/>
<node TEXT="Secure enactment of collaborative process"/>
<node TEXT="Interplay between trust, security and contract management"/>
<node TEXT="Businesses expose programmatic interfaces"/>
<node TEXT="Goal is provision of a framework">
<node TEXT="Provision of standards"/>
</node>
<node TEXT="Life cycle">
<node TEXT="Identification"/>
<node TEXT="Negotiation"/>
<node TEXT="Formation phase"/>
<node TEXT="more?"/>
</node>
<node TEXT="WP2 modelling methodology">
<node TEXT="What about E3?">
<icon BUILTIN="help"/>
</node>
</node>
<node TEXT="VO lifecycle challenges">
<node TEXT="(see matrix)"/>
</node>
<node TEXT="Expected results">
<node TEXT="Framework (architecture, service descr, protocols)">
<node TEXT="Well-defined concepts"/>
<node TEXT="Open standards profiles"/>
</node>
<node TEXT="Open Source reference implementation"/>
<node TEXT="Domain-specific test-beds"/>
</node>
<node TEXT="Role of trust">
<node TEXT="TrustCom services?"/>
</node>
<node TEXT="R&amp;D activities">
<node TEXT="Survey SoA"/>
<node TEXT="Problem definition"/>
<node TEXT="Socioencon legal context"/>
<node TEXT="Conceptural models"/>
<node TEXT="Architecture"/>
<node TEXT="Framework Profile specs"/>
<node TEXT="Testbeds"/>
<node TEXT="Tools and methods"/>
</node>
<node TEXT="Main objective to produce standards profiles for interoperability"/>
</node>
<node TEXT="(Fredrik Vraalsen) CORAS" FOLDED="true">
<node TEXT="Plaform for risk analysis of security critical systems"/>
<node TEXT="Many partners"/>
<node TEXT="Security is managing risks in relation to resources"/>
<node TEXT="Tech solutions not enough">
<node TEXT="e.g. SET too complicated"/>
<node TEXT="Security problems with non-technical origin"/>
<node TEXT="Usability problems can compromise security"/>
</node>
<node TEXT="Security sometimes an afterthought"/>
<node TEXT="Integrate requirements analysis and risk analysis">
<node TEXT="desired features"/>
<node TEXT="undesired features"/>
</node>
<node TEXT="Risk analysis">
<node TEXT="Identify requirements"/>
<node TEXT="Design solutions"/>
</node>
<node TEXT="Security">
<node TEXT="Confidentiality"/>
<node TEXT="Integrity"/>
<node TEXT="Availability"/>
<node TEXT="Non-repudiation"/>
</node>
<node TEXT="Model based risk analysis" FOLDED="true">
<node TEXT="Analysis has target, in context of organization"/>
<node TEXT="Asset - having value"/>
<node TEXT="Threat"/>
<node TEXT="Vulnerabity"/>
<node TEXT="Unwanted incident"/>
<node TEXT="Frequency"/>
<node TEXT="Effect"/>
<node TEXT="Treatment"/>
<node TEXT="(from CORAS)">
<node TEXT="Uses elements of UML"/>
<node TEXT="(mis-use-case diagram)">
<icon BUILTIN="ksmiletris"/>
</node>
</node>
</node>
<node TEXT="Graphical language"/>
<node TEXT="MBRA">
<node TEXT="Process: guidelines &amp; procedures"/>
<node TEXT="(4 others...)"/>
</node>
<node TEXT="Existing standards">
<node TEXT="RM-ODP, UML"/>
<node TEXT="(3 other areas)"/>
</node>
<node TEXT="Terms">
<node TEXT="Threat: worm"/>
<node TEXT="Scenario: PC + windows"/>
<node TEXT="Unwanted incident; infected PC"/>
<node TEXT="Risk: twice a year, infection forwarded to contacts"/>
<node TEXT="Treatment: install virus scannel"/>
</node>
<node TEXT="Tool support">
<node TEXT="Documentation creation and organization"/>
<node TEXT="Integrate existing design tools"/>
<node TEXT="Check correctness (or consistency w.r.t. common rules)"/>
<node TEXT="Re-use work from other projects"/>
<node TEXT="Presentation"/>
<node TEXT="User-friendly interface"/>
</node>
<node TEXT="Platform">
<node TEXT="Integration layer (XML-based)"/>
<node TEXT="databases">
<node TEXT="analysis results"/>
<node TEXT="experiences"/>
</node>
<node TEXT="Consistency checking and fill-in information"/>
<node TEXT="Java open source">
<node TEXT="(Sourceforge)"/>
</node>
</node>
<node TEXT="UML profile for security assessment">
<node TEXT="Target description"/>
<node TEXT="security ontology"/>
<node TEXT="documentation"/>
<node TEXT="Specific diagrams, with UML metamodel"/>
<node TEXT="Diagram elements">
<node TEXT="SWOT"/>
<node TEXT="Assets">
<node TEXT="(kind of class diag)"/>
</node>
<node TEXT="Threats: represented as threat agents"/>
<node TEXT="Unwanted incident">
<node TEXT="chain of events"/>
</node>
<node TEXT="Risk themes">
<node TEXT="(e.g. common treatments)"/>
</node>
<node TEXT="Treatment"/>
</node>
</node>
<node TEXT="Oher projects">
<node TEXT="SECURIS">
<node TEXT="Continuation of CORAS through field trials"/>
</node>
<node TEXT="SARDAS">
<node TEXT="Tool-supported UML profile for specification of &#xa;requirements, policies and architecture for availability."/>
</node>
<node TEXT="ENFORCE">
<node TEXT="Legal issues"/>
</node>
<node TEXT="TrustCom"/>
</node>
<node TEXT="Look for open-source UML modeller (Poseidon?)"/>
</node>
<node TEXT="(Andrew Jones) ALFEBiiTE" FOLDED="true">
<node TEXT="Andrew Jones, Marek Sergot"/>
<node TEXT="Very interdisciplinary">
<node TEXT="Logical"/>
<node TEXT="Socio-cognitive"/>
<node TEXT="???"/>
<node TEXT="Legal"/>
<node TEXT="Specification of computation societies"/>
<node TEXT="&quot;Polish extension&quot;"/>
</node>
<node TEXT="Logical framework"/>
<node TEXT="Application of logical framework to multi-agent system concepts"/>
<node TEXT="Small number of component modaities">
<node TEXT="Action"/>
<node TEXT="Attempt"/>
<node TEXT="Ability"/>
<node TEXT="Belief"/>
<node TEXT="Directive (obligations and permissions)"/>
<node TEXT="Evaluative (preferred)"/>
<node TEXT="Institutionalized power (&quot;counts as&quot;)"/>
</node>
<node TEXT="Conversation/conventions">
<node TEXT="Have formal model of communication that is *convention*-based &#xa;rather than *intention* based.  Cf. Semantic Web &quot;social meaning&quot; debate."/>
</node>
<node TEXT="Modality for information state">
<node TEXT="Frim inform/told modalities, generate..."/>
<node TEXT="Truth, Lie, Silence, Conflicting information"/>
<node TEXT="Gives rise to 15 possible normative positions w.r.t. obligation">
<node TEXT="15 satisfiable out&#xa;of 256 possibilities."/>
</node>
</node>
<node TEXT="What&apos;s the point?">
<node TEXT="Clarify formal characterization of rules &#xa;governing flow of information between agents."/>
<node TEXT="Tried to apply to TrustCom work (e.g. EU data protection rules)"/>
<node TEXT="Logic of need to reveal information in contract negotiation"/>
<node TEXT="Logic of  &quot;weapons of mass deception&quot; or a theory of spin ;-)"/>
</node>
</node>
<node TEXT="(Marek Sergot) ALFEBiiTE" FOLDED="true">
<node TEXT="Start with computational structure"/>
<node TEXT="Define notions such as power, permission, etc, on those structures"/>
<node TEXT="Deontic interpreted systems">
<node TEXT="Knowledge in distributed systems"/>
<node TEXT="States where agent has operated correctly"/>
<node TEXT="Knowledge based on assumption of correct behaviour"/>
</node>
<node TEXT="Language C+, action language from AI">
<node TEXT="Actions, fluents"/>
<node TEXT="default persistence"/>
<node TEXT="concurrent actions"/>
<node TEXT="direct and indirect effects"/>
<node TEXT="++">
<node TEXT="Action generation (counts as)"/>
<node TEXT="Permission"/>
</node>
<node TEXT="Causal Calulator CCalc, U Texas"/>
<node TEXT="C+ defines transition systems, not a logc of"/>
</node>
<node TEXT="Agents may break rules because">
<node TEXT="Competitive"/>
<node TEXT="Unreliable"/>
<node TEXT="(Also: Deliberate violation for exception)"/>
</node>
</node>
<node TEXT="(Christian Damsgaard Jensen)&#xa;SECURE" FOLDED="true">
<node TEXT="Ubiquitous computing"/>
<node TEXT="From local to global computing"/>
<node TEXT="Local" FOLDED="true">
<node TEXT="Single administrative domain"/>
<node TEXT="Can be distributed"/>
<node TEXT="Common rules"/>
<node TEXT="Common infrastructure"/>
</node>
<node TEXT="Global" FOLDED="true">
<node TEXT="Roaming entities"/>
<node TEXT="No common rules"/>
<node TEXT="No authority to enforce behaviour"/>
<node TEXT="No common infrastructure assumed"/>
</node>
<node TEXT="Security" FOLDED="true">
<node TEXT="Increased risk"/>
<node TEXT="May be resource constrained"/>
<node TEXT="No assumption of continuous connectivity"/>
<node TEXT="No unique central authority"/>
<node TEXT="No security perimiter"/>
<node TEXT="No knowledgable system administrator assumed"/>
<node TEXT="Increased risk"/>
</node>
<node TEXT="Mitigating risk" FOLDED="true">
<node TEXT="Insurance"/>
<node TEXT="Contract"/>
<node TEXT="Common mediating authority"/>
<node TEXT="Restrict interactions"/>
<node TEXT="Trust to allow assessment of risk"/>
</node>
<node TEXT="Trust management" FOLDED="true">
<node TEXT="Deal with uncertainty"/>
<node TEXT="Trust can exist outside a legal framework"/>
<node TEXT="Autonomous and Subjective"/>
<node TEXT="Dynamic">
<node TEXT="experience and recommendation"/>
</node>
<node TEXT="Predictor of future behaviout based on past behaviour and evidence"/>
</node>
<node TEXT="Risk assessment" FOLDED="true">
<node TEXT="Possible outcomes"/>
<node TEXT="Assess">
<node TEXT="Probability of outcomes"/>
<node TEXT="Cost of outcomes"/>
<node TEXT="Total risk aggratetes over outcomes"/>
</node>
<node TEXT="..."/>
</node>
<node TEXT="Security requirements for global computing">
<node TEXT="Explicitly address risk"/>
<node TEXT="Predictability"/>
<node TEXT="Security"/>
<node TEXT="Dynamic"/>
<node TEXT="Scalability"/>
<node TEXT="Easy"/>
</node>
<node TEXT="Trust model">
<node TEXT="Trust order"/>
<node TEXT="Information order"/>
</node>
<node TEXT="Event structure">
<node TEXT="Transaction structure"/>
</node>
</node>
<node TEXT="(Dimitris Tsigos, Virtual Trip) &#xa;INNO-UTILITIES" FOLDED="true">
<node TEXT="Innovation-friendly public procurement and&#xa;fight against telecommunications fraud."/>
<node TEXT="Developing">
<node TEXT="Policy recommendation"/>
<node TEXT="Execute a secure demonstration of&#xa;transnational fraud information system"/>
</node>
<node TEXT="Public utility, was public monoply, now deregulation"/>
<node TEXT="Depend on public telecom infrastructure"/>
<node TEXT="Transfer lessons from telecom to other utilities?"/>
</node>
</node>
<node TEXT="Survey" FOLDED="true" POSITION="right">
<node TEXT="Stefan Poslad"/>
<node TEXT="GK"/>
</node>
<node TEXT="Steering group" FOLDED="true" POSITION="right">
<node TEXT="Theo talking about EU review">
<node TEXT="Extra-workgroup activity"/>
<node TEXT="Collection of links to related pubs">
<icon BUILTIN="flag"/>
<node TEXT="General resources page"/>
</node>
<node TEXT="Multidisciplinary: not enough, esp economics"/>
<node TEXT="Like to see more integration"/>
<node TEXT="3 reviewers, scientific advisor + project officer"/>
<node TEXT="Next review winter 2004/05, not yet fixed"/>
</node>
<node TEXT="Paris conference">
<node TEXT="Invited speakers"/>
<node TEXT="Tutorials">
<node TEXT="Funding model"/>
<node TEXT="French rules"/>
</node>
<node TEXT="Panel">
<node TEXT="Andrew Jones to arrange"/>
<node TEXT="1 hour"/>
</node>
<node TEXT="Web site">
<node TEXT="Link from last year conference"/>
<node TEXT="Link from iTrust site"/>
<node TEXT="Link from my site">
<icon BUILTIN="flag"/>
</node>
<node TEXT="Techniques to lift google rating for &quot;trust&quot;"/>
</node>
</node>
<node TEXT="iTrust2">
<node TEXT="Investigating possibility of &#xa;creating WG within IFIP about trust">
<node TEXT="1st impression, no gain for WG"/>
<node TEXT="No concrete support"/>
<node TEXT="Some commitments"/>
<node TEXT="Needs to be truly international"/>
<node TEXT="Some publicity support"/>
<node TEXT="Contact?">
<node TEXT="Steven Marsh"/>
<node TEXT="Zoran Milosevic"/>
</node>
</node>
<node TEXT="Stefan">
<node TEXT="Looking for a follow-on network"/>
</node>
<node TEXT="What vehicle?">
<node TEXT="NoE">
<node TEXT="Full-time job 6 months to prepare"/>
</node>
<node TEXT="Coordinated actions / support action?"/>
</node>
<node TEXT="Actions">
<node TEXT="Complete analysis of (iTrust1???)"/>
<node TEXT="Identify thematic areas"/>
<node TEXT="2-pager"/>
<node TEXT="Identify channels in EU">
<node TEXT="Test with current proj officer"/>
<node TEXT="Find EU position">
<node TEXT="Valerie?  Check with Christos"/>
</node>
</node>
</node>
</node>
</node>
</node>
</map>
