1. Discussion on the Scope of TR- Trust Management in oneM2M
SEC R1
Discussion on the Scope of TR- Trust Management in oneM2M
Group Name: SEC WG
Source: ETRI, Jae-Young Ahn (ETRI)
Meeting Date: SEC#27,
Agenda Item: WI-0065-Trust management in oneM2M

2. Objectives
At TP#25 the WI-0065 “Trust Management in oneM2M” was approved
The WI is to:
investigate and document the definition of trust in IoT system, and recommend a trust establishment model
Identify and document issues related to the establishment of trust in oneM2M platform (focusing on) inter-domain use cases
Evaluate how trust evaluation can be carried out, starting with scenarios in the smart-city context, and identify the trust properties required of IoT entities across oneM2M platform domains
Where identity and identifiers are used in determining trust, this work item will evaluate the means of assigning trust to such elements that allow for identity evaluation and ensuring enforcement of policy over the IoT data ① ② ③ ④ ⑤

3. Related works suggested
ITU-T SG16 CG TRUST TR,
“Trust provisioning in future ICT infrastructures”
ITU-T SG16/13
“Draft recommendation Y.trust-provision”
ETSI ISG NFV, GS NFV-SEC-003,
“NFV Security; Security & Trust Guidance”
ETSI TS v.0.0.3
“Cyber: Id management & naming scheme protection mechanism”
Trust Management
in oneM2M
NIST CPS WG,
“Framework for Cyber-Physical System”
Smart city context
WI-64 (TR-36)
Public IoT, city cloud..
Other SDOs
OTA, TCG, IETF, W3C
Trust related TS & WIs in oneM2M
Security mechanisms on trust domain assumptions : TS-01, TS-03, TS-26, WI –19,21,23,45,57,61
Inter-domain Interworking : WI-56, 58, 66, 69
Large scale/data model/semantics : TS-12, WI-46,53
FP7 projects
uTRUSTit , Inter-TRUST, COMPOSE, etc.

4. Motivation Threat of Cyber-Physical interflow in IoT systems
IoT is to collect data from physical world and stack it into cyber world consistently
“awareness” issues impacting privacy, e.g. big data analysis on dynamic/partial PII
IoT extends access capability to physical context, causing “unknown danger”
Risk management becomes serious, as a failure in cyber space could cause physical pandemonium
“Trustworthy crossover” is desired, as the risk is increasing but the security measure is inadequate.
Application(s)/ services/process
Service(s)
Physical World
Cyber World
Malicious input / fake alarm
App. platform
Threat of abuse
gateway
IoT platform
Threat of “bewitched” reaction
Part of critical /
privacy information
Context of
Physical world
machines
Context of
Global Knowledge
User(s)

5. Justification Necessity of TRUST in oneM2M
Defining the trust relationship between the domains of oneM2M platform is getting more indispensable, as oneM2M claims to support resource and data sharing through horizontal integration.
Integration enables m:n relationship of resources & applications; Increased possibility of (1) inappropriate use/ unauthorized restoration of data, or (2) unfaithful or interfered operation of resources, or (3) discrimination enabled by analytics, etc.
entities are under different ownerships: It has been issued as “trust enablement” for service across trusted network domains
risk of “entities in low trustworthy domain ” increases where the integration becomes large. (e.g. public IoT interworking)
Increased dynamic connections in heterogeneous environment
Unknown potential risks due to the complexity

6. Scope (I) What is needed to define TRUST in oneM2M? Trust Management
Model of trust establishment in oneM2M platform for inter domain use cases are essential, in relation with trust property definitions for oneM2M.
ETSI ISG NFV, GS NFV-SEC-003,
“NFV Security; Security & Trust Guidance”
ETSI TS v.0.0.3
“Cyber: Id management & naming scheme protection mechanism”
For “dynamic connectivity in low trustworthy environment” issues, NFV security & trust model will help.
There could be more issues such as for device trust, IoT data trust, and context-aware trust as well. In need of a step more generic approach based in ITU-T works
ITU-T SG16 CG TRUST TR,
ITU-T SG16/13
Trust Management
in oneM2M

7. Scope (II) What leads oneM2M to TRUST in full-scale? Trust Management
Smart city will be a crucial environment to investigate the use cases on TRUST issues, as applications and devices under city-wide different domain governance have different strategies of operation that requires trusted interactions.
Smart city model of oneM2M platform interworking will bring us a wide range of trust issues in a city, including the case of interworking with heterogeneous platforms and time critical CPS systems. A trust interworking adaptor/agent, CPS assurance facet can be considered in the design. Cloud trust, public IoT are also the issues to address.
Smart city context
WI-64 (TR-36)
Public IoT, city cloud..
NIST CPS WG,
“Framework for Cyber-Physical System”
Trust Management
in oneM2M
FP7 projects
uTRUSTit , Inter-TRUST, COMPOSE, etc.

8. 1. Definition of TRUST in oneM2M
General definition of TRUST
Motivation of TRUST in IoT system
Concept of trust and trust provisioning
Trust relationship, trust domains
Trust provisioning
Necessity of TRUST in oneM2M
oneM2M introduces the platform for horizontal integration
Resource and data sharing, multi-party administrative domain/entity, and horizontal layering of CSE change the trust environment
Potential risks in the large scale implementation of oneM2M and interworking in heterogeneous / time critical CPS environment

9. 2. oneM2M TRUST establishment
High level Trust Goal of oneM2M - Areas of Trust models in oneM2M?
Platform domain trust (enhanced security & trust of oneM2M)
To make sure the oneM2M platform and related domains/entities interworking trustable, to support (existing) operations with (enhanced) trust.
IoT trust (Cyber-Physical-Social System trust)
Device trust : device reliability/ availability
IoT data trust : OAM&P , data protocol
Context-aware IoT trust : context-aware operation, share data analytics to applications
Smart city & CPS trust (Trust for large scale/ time critical integration)
Trust for heterogeneous platforms interworking : trust policy negotiation, etc.
CPS trust: trust encompassing physical & cyber world. Trust assurance facet and/or digital object market
Lifecycle management of Trust (in oneM2M)
Assigning trust
Evaluating and validating trust, Re-evaluating trust
Invalidating trust, re-establishing trust
Delegating, recommendation

10. Reference: ETSI-NFV-SEC-003
Assigning trust
Trust or distrust other entity completely
Criteria to assign it is on identity or context
Evaluating and validating trust
Validating trust is the exercise of going through the various measures of trust applicable for a particular trust relationship, evaluating the levels of trust assurance and, if they meet the criteria set, validating that trust relationship.
Issues on the management of trust
Parameter for trust evaluation
Method for the evaluation (reputational, game theoretical, probabilistic, look-up)
Re-evaluating / invalidating trust
Re-establishing trust
the process of recreating a trust relationship between entity A and entity B which has previously existed, but which has, for whatever reason, failed.
two sets of options: delegation up the chain of trust and peer-mediated distrust.

11. 3. oneM2M TRUST use cases
Trust establishment for interworking oneM2M nodes under different ownership
Trust establishment for oneM2M entities interworking with non-oneM2M entities in different ownership domains
Trust establishment for oneM2M field node for device sharing
Trust establishment for oneM2M data sharing, context-aware data sharing
Trust establishment for oneM2M platform working in a smart city, in cooperation with heterogeneous type platforms
Trust establishment for oneM2M platform working for an industry domain under a critical condition
Trust establishment for oneM2M platform working for convergence service environment ( heterogeneous CPS system, ownership based trust application, etc.)
Trust establishment for oneM2M platform with city cloud, public IoT, etc.

12. 4. TRUST properties in oneM2M
Based upon the results from the research carried through the previous sections, TRUST properties of oneM2M will be broadly deducted:
it would be a form of potential meta data of attributes related to the trustworthiness of oneM2M system
It will also investigate the trust mechanisms necessary for oneM2M entities
Research in the identity verification, authentication, and data privacy preservation are FFS.