- From: Gavigan, Kevin <kgavigan@jaguarlandrover.com>
- Date: Wed, 29 Jul 2015 16:34:00 +0100
- To: Junichi Hashimoto <xju-hashimoto@kddi.com>
- Cc: public-auto-privacy-security@w3.org
- Message-ID: <CAKaHsmcAh3GHRWnBCZK-g66W+VA5gKRgYXiS7Cx=Y_vDbBMX6w@mail.gmail.com>
Hi Junichi, Thanks, your proposal seems like a good idea to me as it will help us to gather scenarios more quickly I will plan to add brief use cases to the spreadsheet... Regards and best wishes, Kevin *Kevin Gavigan BSc (Hons), MSc, PhD, MCP MCTS* *Software Architect* *Connected Infotainment* *Mobile: 07990 084866* *Email:* kgavigan@jaguarlandrover.com *Office address:* *GO03/057** • **Building 523, **Gaydon** • **Maildrop: (G03)* *Jaguar Land Rover • Banbury Road • Gaydon • Warwick • CV35 0RR* On 24 July 2015 at 02:58, Junichi Hashimoto <xju-hashimoto@kddi.com> wrote: > Hi, > > I've investigated several methods and practices of security/privacy > analysis (e.g., goal oriented analysis, misuse case analysis, STRIDE/DREAD, > ISO 15408, ITU-T X.1121) and think that we should apply a customized > procedure for our case. > > Compared to usual security analysis, our security/privacy target is not > completely definable because it is not actual software but rather a > platform for software. So listing up use cases as Kevin did would be the > best way to figure out our scope. > > On the other hand, I personally think we could start with a bit simpler > description for our first step and add the details later, e.g., during the > second iteration of use case discussion, to get ideas from wider stake > holders. > > What do you think? > > FYI, I've just put some examples on a spreadsheet[1] to show what I am > thinking. > > Also the following is the basic (simple) procedure I'd propose: > Step 1. Listing up brief use cases and concerns > Step 2. Select items for our scope and investigate them deeply (Kevin's is > this level) > Step 3. Derive requirements from the investigation > > In order to gather all the important points, I'd like to suggest we > iterate the above procedure at least twice before LC. > > Please feel free to give your comments on the above proposal. > I'd like to talk about this procedure during the upcoming f2f meeting in > Seattle as well. > > [1] > https://docs.google.com/spreadsheets/d/14ij-2I-H4HbilVQ_muCmUayVqmVfdbkoke690MA0kdo/edit#gid=0 > > Junichi > > >
Received on Wednesday, 29 July 2015 15:34:52 UTC