[iot-discussion] Proposed US legislation

I would assume Europol's role is limited up to the point it turns into criminal acts that warrant investigation and prosecution.

From a European perspective I assume this would mostly fit ENISA's mandate in respect to (critical) infrastructure stability. 

Groet,

MarcoH
-- 
Sent from a small touch screen, apologies for typos

> On 4 Aug 2017, at 16:03, Michael Oghia <mike.oghia at gmail.com> wrote:
> 
> Hi Gordon,
> 
> Based on this points, I think it's a very prudent and reasonable piece of policy. I suppose the relevant institutions within the EU would be the European Commission and perhaps Europol. 
> 
> Best,
> -Michael
> __________________
> 
> Michael J. Oghia
> Independent #netgov consultant & editor
> 
> Belgrade, Serbia
> Skype: mikeoghia
> Twitter | LinkedIn
> 
>> On Fri, Aug 4, 2017 at 4:00 PM, Gordon Lennox <gordon.lennox.13 at gmail.com> wrote:
>> "Specifically, the Internet of Things (IoT) Cybersecurity Improvement Act of 2017 would:
>> 
>> Require vendors of Internet-connected devices purchased by the federal government ensure their devices are patchable, rely on industry standard protocols, do not use hard-coded passwords, and do not contain any known security vulnerabilities.
>> Direct the Office of Management and Budget (OMB) to develop alternative network-level security requirements for devices with limited data processing and software functionality.
>> Direct the Department of Homeland Security’s National Protection and Programs Directorate to issue guidelines regarding cybersecurity coordinated vulnerability disclosure policies to be required by contractors providing connected devices to the U.S. Government.
>> Exempt cybersecurity researchers engaging in good-faith research from liability under the Computer Fraud and Abuse Act and the Digital Millennium Copyright Act when in engaged in research pursuant to adopted coordinated vulnerability disclosure guidelines.
>> Require each executive agency to inventory all Internet-connected devices in use by the agency."
>> https://www.warner.senate.gov/public/index.cfm/pressreleases?id=06A5E941-FBC3-4A63-B9B4-523E18DADB36
>> 
>> The legislation does not try and define “things” and instead uses the term “Internet-connected devices”. I think this is a good approach.
>> 
>> It is though limited to devices purchased by the Federal government and so does not include devices bought by companies and/or consumers.
>> 
>> Various US agencies are seen as having a role. Which would be the equivalent agencies in the EU?
>> 
>> Gordon
>> 
>> 
>> _______________________________________________
>> iot-discussion mailing list
>> iot-discussion at ripe.net
>> https://lists.ripe.net/mailman/listinfo/iot-discussion
>> 
> 
> _______________________________________________
> iot-discussion mailing list
> iot-discussion at ripe.net
> https://lists.ripe.net/mailman/listinfo/iot-discussion
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: </ripe/mail/archives/iot-wg/attachments/20170804/112b46fe/attachment.html>