tv Technology Policy Institute- Internet of Things CSPAN November 21, 2017 11:01am-12:13pm EST
the >> up next on c-span two comment conversation on cybersecurity and the internet of things. we'll hear from congressman darrell issa, from the technology policy institute in aspen, colorado, this is just under an hour. >> okay, we would get started where the coffee corner begins to filter out over there. at this panelist on the internet of things. the internet of things is a wide-ranging term, generally describing computing devices in everyday industrial products or things connected to each other. some of them are household products. i'm fully connecting all of my
life to alexa, with light bulbs connected to firmware. my wife is not very happy with this, but i keep telling her, jen, it is getting better and better. soon before you know it turning on the lights will be as easy as flipping a switch. [laughter] household items are the least important part of iot. enterprise and industrial use will help us allocate resources more efficiently. there were two principal challenges we'll talk about. first is the network, which is what kind of infrastructure do we need to facilitate robust iot that need complete ubiquitous coverage but don't need to send videos to each other. second, how do we secure the network. it is one thing for the terrorist to know that i need more ice cream, but it's another when you talk about your self driving car or the electrical grid. we have a great panel today to
discuss these issues. again let's introduce them quickly and then we will go to discussion. ralph alderfer, vice president technology at cable outcome of global innovation and r&d consortium joins cablelabs from the sec, where he guided u.s. wireless broadband policy of chief data officer of the wireless bureau and before they shoot communication policy at the white house office of management and budget. ashley durmer senior vice senior affairs for legato networks and is responsible or promoting a vision to provide next-generation connectivity using it bit inspector in a next-generation connectivity subduing his postoperative work of senator chris dodd and also the election of president barack obama and the 2004 reelection of senator tom daschle. jerry faulhaber is professor emeritus of business economics and public policy and management
at the work in school and previously served as chief economist at this fcc and current research includes wireless markets, public broadband public-policy markets, specter policy, public safety radio in the filesharing music operate, net neutrality and i.t. security. the honorable darrell issa represents people of california's 49th congressional district in the u.s. house of representatives since 2001. his committee memberships include the house judiciary committee where he serves as chairman of the subcommittee on intellectual property and the internet a lot with democratic suzy talabani with the internet of things his end he speaks to these issues not just as representative of a district, but also practitioner. he holds 37 patents founded an electronics company and also served as chairman of the consumer electronics association. david young is vice president for his responsible for identifying and assessing emerging issues from a
developing internet technology matters and assessing key technology dedication industry trends and also experience into experiencing to this topic was for ricin, r&b group on advanced technology groups including vo ip, architecture and audio image compression and he has 10 patents and is also member of the ieee communications society, so it yes i did do a debate in high school. i can talk a lot faster than that if you want me to. so let's get started here the first thing i give a brief quick definition of iot. rob, maybe you can expand. what am we mean when we talk about the internet of things. >> sure, thanks to scott. thanks for having me. slusher to be here with the congressman and i congressman and making colleagues. thank you for scheduling this panel before the space and time makes sense to seem a petty mission and the broader cosmological order.
but i do have a quibble with the agenda little bit. you put iot after a.i. and i would've done it the other way around because the sensors and connected devices that are part of what i call iot are an input to the application that we think about when we think about a.i. and that term may mean sort of the narrow definition come in at the chennai super intelligence that will one day rule us all, but in the more sort of narrow verticals of application and transportation sector, health care and a number of other perfect areas of the economy. the easy answer to your question i think is the iot is everything connected and we can break that down into smaller and smaller categories, things like enterprise versus consumer, but maybe just to set the stage a little bit, useful to talk about aspects of life interesting. it is growing a lot. a big reason we are talking about it. if you look at the analyst
forecasts out there and we all know analysts are never wrong, but the forecast is at least two times growth over the next five years or so in likely to be more than that versus estimates that differ on where we are starting from by some accounts we are at several billion already, others have a set 15, 10 billion or so. there is a lot and it's poised to grow more and there's some skepticism around that as it is all just hype. i think there is some organic trendsetters sort of driving things in the direction of everything that should be connected, eventually becoming connected. moore's law driving down the cost and have the capability of devices that is generating a lot more things that produce data. we have advances in data analytics to make use of that data yet on the network we have ipv6 network bandwidth making more room for connected devices. and so, i think there is
certainly science pointing the direction of growth. we just heard a lot in the prior panel in terms of the applications that can make use of all of this data. you know, saving lives, increasing productivity. but i think when you start to get into is this all what is the next layer below all of these high-level trends, there are some challenges and is not to say they are insurmountable, but things are little more complicated than they might occur first blush. some challenges our technology base. the first one is power consumption. as a think about billions of devices out there, a good number of them are not going to be plugged into the great all the time. they need battery power of some sort or the ability to generate their own power, so there is some trade-off with their ability to communicate and energy consumption will dry certain consideration of iat going forward, trade-offs of how you program devices out in the
wild for her seven years, how do you keep them updated? challenges in the market, interoperability is one of them we see right now are not all devices can talk to each other. proprietary you need to pick before you really take advantage of some of these technological advances. issues of trust, consumer trust and devices other challenges. i picked you up that are the most relevant for this room because they are horizontal challenges that are enablers are not a iot another spectrum and security. as you have these billions more devices come online with the the wireless resources to make sure they can perform their function and we need to make sure that as the number of devices grow, we don't see the number of tax grow linearly.
>> you are the offending essay, so go ahead. >> i'm done. go for it. >> okay, i just thought i'd maybe jump in here. rob knows this stuff much better than i do. in fact, i meant the opposite end of the spectrum. some months ago he called me up inside how would you like to give a paper on cybersecurity and the internet of things and i said i don't know a thing about that. i said i don't even have an internet of things in my house. i don't have a smart refrigerator. i thought wait a second, i have a smart tv. most of us have a smart tv. i have to connect this to the wi-fi and it's a thing. i thought okay, i don't have to worry about it too much. so then i was reading something that said it's a sandstone. so, samsung tv have these things where you came gesture added. you can speak to it and it will follow your commands.
okay, i then read that it also sends that to a third party. anything that appears it sends to a third party for analysis. okay, now the next step is it also has a camera so that you can gesture to it but then again you don't have to use your remote. and then also sends out to a third party. okay, now here is the kicker. the tvs in our bedroom, okay, so all of a sudden the internet of things -- [laughter] the internet of things hit home assume i do suspect in occasionally my wife and i have to move the tv out of the bedroom. so that is what the internet of things is. and that is kind of the other side of what rob was discussing. but that is what it means in practicing reality.
[inaudible] [laughter] [inaudible] >> that is on youtube, right? that's all i wanted to say. >> privacy and security related privacy i see a big deal, but that also raises questions about what this infrastructure is all about. in this case apparently when you bought for video streaming. and ashley, how do your companies think about what the demand for this will be in the future and how to target investment? what is investment for an internet of things? >> sure, so again, thank you for the opportunity to join this panel. when you think about the internet of things, usually think about the thing, the device itself.
but it is really a system that is made up of different parts. the device is an important part. another important part is the network that connects that devise to the internet or the backend systems in the third part that is important are those backend systems where the data is collected, where the analytics take place, where the control of the system occurs. those three pieces are all very important. on the network side, there is no one-size-fits-all. you know, we mentioned video streaming and ask him a wireless connections will be incredibly powerful for internet of things in a very low latency connections are going to be extremely enabling. but that is not the only option and it's not the only requirement because not all internet of things applications require very high bandwidth upstream or downstream or very
low latency. and so, you'll see a diversity of networks and solutions for connecting these devices. for some their own broadband connection with wi-fi will be perfectly adequate. for others you will want to work anywhere you go, so you'll want a very widely deployed technology like m1 lte that is specifically designed for internet of things and one of the things that makes it well-suited for connect the device is is that allows for very low power operation as rob mentioned the importance of that. it also doesn't deliver the very high bandwidth, but again, for some applications it is not the most important thing. and then, you numb, for ultra- ubiquitous connectivity, you may look to satellite. >> i agree with everything david just said. you know, when we bring it up to a higher level, when we think
about what you -- [inaudible] what was that? >> was that a pun? >> achaea spec to. as david just articulated its low-end and spectrum. they all have different propagation characteristics, but really the network said the future are going to require each of those dynamics of those in order to provide means serve the diversity of applications that the iot will result in. we are focused on the enterprise side of the equation, which will require ultra- reliability, high security and ubiquitous coverage, which is satellite, which satellite does provide. we are also strong believers as david mentioned in just being tax neutral. you know, historically you're a satellite company, cellular company, wi-fi, cyber. all the different applications
could benefit from a mix of all of those technologies. again, some of the mission-critical industrial internet of things will require a satellite for coverage for pervasive connectivity in and then for the ground systems to come in for the lower bandwidth applications. >> so, let's talk about the policy aspects of it. congressman, this is a good place for you to weigh in. what do you see as the biggest policy impediments to developing an internet of things and what is congress' role and how does your caucus work and so on. >> well, the internet of things for policy individuals is we have to unwind the bad decisions of past policy decisions and that is not a small -- that is not intended to be joe kline. it's very, very sincere when you look at how we've allocated
spectrum, how we've made decisions. i won't name names, but in the earlier conversations there is discussion about how we came up with the wi-fi, which today is the clear backbone of so many internet of things including the switches that your wife continues to be confronted with. you know, it was basically junk spectrum. nobody wanted that they could throw for useless things. i shouldn't say useless because baby monitors were considered. yes, the baby is going to cry and you're going to hear it in the next room on this low-power device. it was the replacement for the other junk stuff because we had cb and these others although 32 megahertz is suddenly in again. you look at this history and you say okay, if you're going to start again and if i could put everyone in this room with fair not so hidden agendas in a room and say okay, what works for the people who aren't in the room,
which is your wife, the consumer and you say okay, what do we need to do? the first thing we need to do is recognize the technology of today is no longer bandwidth can find common meaning i make a product and they can do x amount of bandwidth with an antenna, that is pretty much passé. very broad band products that can sense, listen before talking, operate in very diverse phase with different power consumption means that you can have devices that are much better than they once were, except of course as we look at it, where do you see it? you see a wi-fi, the newest wi-fi finally is the mission network that is somewhat intelligent, but does cover all be available day and then uses a third day on so it's not going to make a decision about what
you are doing on a band that was in fact jump band, but went to one that travels further when the cells, so when they can't talk to each other, they can't. well, those are succeeding in spite of, if you will, history. let me just quickly go through two things. i promise to run that i talked to before hand that it was going to talk about the shuffle being artificial intelligence device. well, the switch that you are talking about that you are putting in for your lighting system is in fact in many ways a shovel because you can push on the button and it turns on and off. it is a little smarter when you hook it to your iphone and it's even a little smarter, well-trained, maybe a well-trained dog when you tell alexa that you want to turn the light on that 50% on read if you have that feature. it is not yet -- we are not yet
talking about artificial intelligence. artificial intelligence is clearly the next step or continues to think of learning gets smarter smarter than anyone director of it. and so, all of that is going to be necessary and none of it particularly means government involvement, which is a good team. you'll innovate without it. let me just bring you back to two closing items. when i was a young, young, young black, there were three things that came to my house and then one of six children, so we always debated which one i was related to. there is a post man, and no command and actually bred man in the each delivered to the house. you know, the milkman in the post man in the bred men are gone today. that doesn't exist, although amazon has sort of replaced it for both. the fact is at one time, the government made the decision that there is a universal delivery obligation, in other
words, a service that was fair, essentially the service was free even if you paid for usage and that we make sure it hits every point on the planet. so, when the government is trying to decide about this essential new service, have we fallen short in three areas? one, 100% coverage of our entire country, even when it's inconvenient, which the post office does. to come the real standard-setting, whether set by government or private enterprise in cooperation with government for true universal low-power, mid-power and obviously the question of proprietary high-power, the classic license phase. and that is where you see the question of are we care, have we really done that? i'm going to close even though i saturday close to it. and then we get into cyberand on the questions of security and that is weaker than the question
for today. obviously we all have to work on in government does not ban or in the private sector doesn't have a perfect answer, and but my view is if you go back to the shovel, the go back to the milkman, mailman and the bred guy and asked the question of wait a second, and is there one universal guaranteed to every point in america and if not common is that the government's primary role is sort of ensuring universal access, which is not done just by licensing space comments got to be done by initiatives beyond that. >> jerry, you've been thinking about the institutions that do and don't exist for iot, so how does what you just heard play into that? congressman issa talked about unwinding bad policy decisions. is this you?
>> i can talk about unwinding bad policy but no once can a talk on a congressman to do it. >> after cybersecurity, let me mention first of all the cybersecurity issue associated with the internet of things. it's generally been perceived that the internet of things is a whole lot easier for actors to put viruses on. they tend to be unprotect head. nobody who has them, like me, is paid any attention to them. and in fact, we've had at least two very serious tv os attacks, one of which was last october, a company called dying, which was running servers and therefore it took down a whole lot of people who use that server and that a
company called inter the in september and the protection against them is very little. when rob asked me to do this i kind of setting it to read about this, so i read up on the report by the tag the department of homeland security thing one of the problems and how do we fix them? basically the technical aspects of how to protect against the internet of things, cybersecurity. the most recent being i've seen came from people labs which goes a step beyond not. it was published this summer. but their simple stuff. hard to do. also focused on consumer goods, too. lots of internet of things do this. use the best current software, but the security divide common
design phase, simple. if we design the internet like that, we have a different story. automated secure update and vulnerability management. strong authentication, configuration tested and all this stuff. thank god somebody else did it. how do we actually get this stuff in place and there is the institutional issue. the industry we have here, you have to think about what this industry looks like. first of all we've got hundreds of manufacturers make and model computers that one refrigerators. hundreds of them. most of them aren't in the united states. so they've got to be part of the story. dozens of sellers who are selling refrigerators, home
alarm systems, televisions and as you can see, there's a whole bunch of different industries. they aren't even in the same industry. millions of consumers, most of whom don't even know they have a computer in these things, so these are people who have pcs, you know you can probably download an antivirus, but with the smart refrigerator you don't know that, you don't care. the last thing that makes this even worse is the real danger is not that you're going to load something into your refrigerator and somebody's going to figure out how often you open the refrigerator door and therefore whether open it up. the real problem is launching attacks on other people. that's an externality and if you are one of the people that launch it, you don't even know what the damage is not for you. so, how do you fix that? this is an industry where you
need to establish standards throughout the vertical chain. you need customers to be involved. that's what you need. as a couple of conclusions about this. >> to add another question that, in many years ago i was on a national academy channel looking at software reliability and always came back to con activities versus reliability. is there a similar trade-off. that the device can be the more connected devices to the rest of the world a less secure it is or not a false trade-off? because jerry mentioned the trade-off maybe you can start off by answering not and then i would like to hear from the network people, how they do
that. >> sure come you >> sure commie pagoda cablelabs informed insight to check out our recommendations on this. in terms of your question, scott, and if you think about iot merrily, perhaps the answer is yes, a more open iot at the device level could lead to reductions in security, but to david's point is much broader than devices with this application. i don't think at the level important to consumers there is that trade-off because to provide an example, your lightbulb in your house doesn't need to be talking to the entire internet. if it's open to the entire internet, it might be compromised in the late jerry outline to start a new spammer being part of the larger service pack. but it can talk to your home hub, a gateway in your house that has appropriate firewall with no reduction in utility for the label to you the consumer.
when we talk about iot devices, but systems and applications, how is conductivity grown in recent history and probably much further back than that through network effects. you know, to the extent iot is growing, it is because there is value in systems being connected in a smart way. >> at the very highest level, and does it make sense in an industry, in this industry to design the device is to be able to go to rehab or something that has more control or is it cheaper just to build something that can connect to anything? >> well, cheaper can be a problem in the space. you can have device communications, device to hub, device a cloud, cloud to cloud, but in terms of sort of the trade-off between security and
cheapness as you put it, i think there is a way to bridge that gap in and gets a little bit to the institutions question that jerry was outlining and as the congressman in terms of developing standards and making it easy for new suppliers of i.t. devices to build to those standards and allowing consumers that use of comic dignity that comes from a common platform. you have industry coming together, writing a standard, making that available broadly. then you sort of get past the problem of the small iot manufacturer with people in their country not thinking about security they can adopt the standard as their base code for their device out quickly and secure. >> from the network perspective -- how do you -- >> we actually don't think they
are mutually exclusive in any way. they're such a diverse range of applications and products and the iot perspective itself as the applications on the other end. and the way we like to think about it is each layer of the stack essentially will require a different book. we don't think all systems are created equal. you know, should the electric grid as an example of the teams -- same type of security requirements as my young daughter's electric toothbrush that connects to my phone, probably not. i think is an industry what we are looking at is what type of security requirements and best practices almost do we need to implement at the device level or the network architecture design level to make sure each application has to security requirements that it needs to be the consumer's expectations.
we also absolutely believe in consumer education. data is what is becoming extremely important in terms of enterprise and industrial entities taking conductivity to the next level and what can we do with that data improving our operations and so making sure consumers understand what type of data is being read is extremely important as well. >> you have the hub versus the directly connect to devices. having a hub certainly can be advantageous as particularly for low cost consumer oriented devices for operating in the home let's say, but that just moves the security point to the hub, which is connected, so you have the same security issues, but now it is hopefully being taken care of by a space to make sure it's done properly.
the good news is i think most of the tools are already available to produce the secure internet of things and the weather talk about digital certificates that authenticate devices in on them to be managed securely, updated securely, encryption that will ensure the integrity of the data flows, all of these tools are available. the problem is not everybody either knows that they are available or uses or chooses to use them. even worse, there's some really basic practices often ignored by creating an internet of things devices that is published and so it is easily accessed by anybody who wants to go in there and change the settings. the tools are available. it's really just a matter of producing the education both at the consumer level and across the ecosystem. >> just because the tools are available doesn't mean they'll be used.
so far i haven't heard anything about incentives. >> let's look at the incentive as it's never going to be good enough. the education is never going to be good enough. decades ago i was a young armor officer training for how we were going to beat the russians in the next war and there was an interesting difference between how the u.s. went to war in how the soviets went to war. we went to war with every single tank. i happen to be an armor officer. take they had a radio in full training of how to command. every private have the training of what would happen if you went to war. the soviet union had command and control that use hand signals for the most part and literally did not put radios in anything but the command vehicle. they put fake antenna. the concept was they didn't trust their soldiers. so now let's skip forward you
are going to have losses. our goal was to knock out their command and control and the rest of the guys didn't know what to do. when we are looking at these trillions of devices and we know there will be failures, the first question is how do we ensure that the failure of 100,000 is not the failure of the system. rather than say we are going to have better education and change the password, we are going to put a hub in, the first thing is the system has to be built with an assumption that there will be failure in the assumption that the systems, whether it is the electric grid, the internet itself through the ability to protect itself into view with inevitable losses. by the way, some of those are electronic devices that simply
go haywire. there is the device that creates it own noise like this one with the substitute just a moment ago. you start with that. the second part which has a bigger public interest is a debate that is not settled and then very personally involved in it if you will. the former fbi director james comey had no ability to get the information needed from the san bernardino bomber except by forcing apple to create and not dave, remote backdoor enough that the magistrate had ordered that there is sufficient constitutional protections in this order. now, a matter of weeks later for a million dollars given the data he wanted in a few weeks after that the cambridge professor for 187-dollar showed how he could do exactly what a guy like me hunt said in the argument with
the then fbi director. we have to have a real debate about whether encryption were on rail and unbreakable because if they are not unreal in unbreakable, then they will be exploited. and if they are unreal and unbreakable, organizations like the fbi, cia and others will be constantly disappointed that they can't get what they desperately want. this is not a new argument. back in the 90s, quite frankly we had 128 encryption does a cop in the way we got past that is microsoft and others again having their heart all over the world and it created a pressure because of its failure. so we are repeating not right now, just as we did with encrypting software's work can be easily copied. we are repeating the question is do you have an absolute right and do we have an obligation to
make these things secure? and if so, that inevitably will empower those who will use it for nefarious purposes to be protected. that goes all the way to the highest levels of government around the world. >> how does that fit into your institutional? >> let me finish up here. i certainly don't want to get in the way of the eclipse. let me talk about some of the incentive and some of the institutions set up. one of the problems with such a very wide variety of players in this game. how are we going to get everybody on board? there's two extremes here. one is to say let's set of voluntary organizations or adopt standards and will sell that. although a to the ftc or somebody saying we are going to have regulation.
now, i identified a number of them. one is the voluntary approach. the problem is this works well when you have a small number of firms all of whom can affirm the externality. we have hundreds of thousands of firms, it becomes difficult to actually polices. this would work, for example, if you could say let's do the equivalent of the good housekeeping seal of approval. a totally voluntary thing and if everybody signed up for that consumers give a, this would be a good solution. i'm not sure this is the best solution for iot. the second one would be voluntary standards, both legal enforcement cameras would love back because product liability becomes the way to enforce it. .works. the problem with this of course is it is costly and it may completely missed the externality which is to say i have this on my refrigerator.
it creates all this damage to everybody else. i don't care about silliness. this is not a good way to do this. regulatory, this is the third. regulatory joint efforts with regulatory commission and with -- i'm sorry, with the industry. joint effort. an example of this might be epa and energy star, where the appliance people get to put on the energy star and that is done jointly with the epa. fcc, for all the problems is a form of joint regulation. works well when you have a lot of firms. customers not involved in the problem in some externalities. as a potential -- there's the potential for regulatory caps
which we have to be concerned about. this could work well for iot. if you do for regulation will not respond to technical change very well. to be in forest, but slow to change. in a technical field, that is not a good solution. i would tend to go with the joint regulatory voluntary application. that would be a good solution to come up with. it is something i think that'll work well with iot. it will not be perfect and without a lot of what happens to the tail of things and
everything you said i think was excellent. but you do need to have some institutional structure around which laws and standards can be built. it's important to think that through totally private versus totally public. >> u.s. about incentives and suggested there is a lack of incentives. i pushback on that. i think that there is no one internet of things. we are talking about a broad spectrum of solutions, so if you are a business and you are deemed your fleet of trucks coming of a strong incentive to make sure those systems are secure and you are going to require the supplier that you are working with will ensure the security and you will take all the steps you need because a failure will cost your business in terms of reputation or actual loss or damages.
if you are a city deploying a smart traffic management solution, you have a strong incentive to make sure that is not packable that someone can't get in there. there are incentives for those sorts of things. it's when you start getting down to the security camera for your home that you are buying from a small company and so you as a consumer might not care if they get packed and used in a denial of service attack, but causes the externality. segmenting sorted the use cases than the problems in identifying where perhaps the incentives are weaker might be helpful. but there are also mitigation solutions that can be put into place. a.i. team before they send one of the applications could be identifying abnormal communications so if the camera starts engaging and not normal behavior, and the a.i. in your
home router could identify about for you and suggest you unplug back pain and check the password. i do think that there are a lot of incentives already in place, but that said, of course the ftc as a backdrop, if you do fail to properly secure your iot network and consumer data is lost, you are liable to be called in front of the ftc enforced to enter a long consent decree. >> that's probably the one issue that is least resolved right now and cybersecurity. the federal trade commission has decided in some pretty common cases, which is the michael dougherty case for those who haven't heard it or read the book, where they did not have a
standard and wanted to hold accountable for things they have not published a new look and say, where jerry was very good, government cannot grab the best part says, that means the government enforces there even when plaintiffs lawyers in forest, they are alluding to the ita you should have known and that is where a lot of what the internet needs is going to be all about. and hardware are soft where in fishing that down and the question in where this falls apart for the consumer. i have a biased because i came out of the consumer electronics
industry where our motto is that they have to read the instructions, you failed in the product. i know that it's not just for the men in the room. the reality is that if we do our job right, the internet of things will be products which may have to be shut down when you do something wrong, but will not require an updated into best practices and it will not require that the product on the day it launched can be anything other than best practices with the firmware on matt date and updatable as threats change and evolve. by the way, sadly to meet the demand of a future product. that sequence of events is where i think you've done a great job if the hybrid of things we've done in the past. is it liable when somebody is
deceiving the public, yes. after something happens come you must not have lived up to best practices. i think not anything that is where we are going to have to change governments view, keep the plaintiffs lawyers out of it whenever possible, >> will go to questions in a minute. the intersection of standard and regulation, it's kind of a place where these efforts might come together. so without naming names, who exactly is kind of not paying attention, not willing to go along? >> already. can i name names?
[laughter] now, the reality is that service providers as we work for the cable industry that provides conductivity, we have an ongoing relationship with the customer and we feel a pretty hefty responsibility to do what we can to protect our customers. you know, that sort of relationship isn't uniform across the system than they are is those that really want to shift units and i'm an ongoing relationship with their customer. so you know, it is a challenge in making some of what is discussed is the right type of approach and i would quibble with jerry's energy star analogy, to be clear on that program, epa and d.o.e. write the rules for a public comment process that takes a year, two years to play that out if that moves too slowly for iot in a
much more complex problem we are dealing with here. it is that to industry to step up and provide the tools that the ecosystem needs to address these issues and just as a bit of a plug in an example for what the industry was doing in this space, cable labs and verizon both are members of the open contact dvd foundation. 350 foundations actually writing code. not just very talk about best practices. we actually write code and enable interoperability and security for devices to make that available through open source to get up the issue of standing up for products of the solutions are starting to take root. what i would note is defining success is important to keep in mind. we go back to the example jerry raised for the dns provider
being attacked by the.net, just to put the magnitude of the attack in. security researchers have recently concluded that the population of devices that comprise the.net that led to that attack and took down twitter and some other services have a steady-state between 200,300,000 iot devices. that sounds like a lot until you think about the billions of devices that are out there. this is less than 1% devices on the market today were responsible for a major event like that. we need to be cautious about what it looks like. i don't know that we will ever have perfect security, but certainly some tools in place right now to make incremental changes. >> that's a different kind of question. setting aside the issues you've had the spectrum -- >> what he talking about?
>> as an entrance into this industry, are certain aspects of setting up a network for this sort of future easier and are there also more difficult things like getting into some of these group by setting standards? >> so, we actually view it as an unbelievable opportunity in a lot of ways. i think what the congressman was talking about, how do we undo a lot of these things, we were talking about a significant amount of spectrum and so that presents unbelievable opportunity to start looking and implementing from the start from a tool like rob just talked about, some of the best practices already out there and focusing the network encore industrial industries like the utility sector, oil and gas that are really desperate and looking forward an advanced level of conductivity that is not quite meeting the needs they have right now is a look to further
automating their systems. so yeah, the story in our story is not anyone in this room, but the other side to really see a unique opportunity to deploy green fields back term in a way that meets and uses the best technology that we have been told that we currently have today. >> we have a little time for questions. right there. [inaudible] 1143. >> yeah, as one of the authors, i was really intrigued by what rob was saying about ocs. the thing that we identify basically that iot basically means the equivalent of wi-fi alliance that could put pressure on 802 to design standards and test procedures and all that in providing software takes it a step further.
so congratulations. i'm glad you're doing not. [inaudible] -- the organization we just set up last year. it is a form of the sorts of discussions are happening. the intent is to make it a consumer grant people can recognize to get transparency issue. >> we shouldn't forget that it's not that iot has a unique security problem. the internet itself is not very secure. when wi-fi was first developed, he wasn't at all secure. so this is kind of -- kind of a process that new technologies go through where we have the big challenge is to make it work at all and then you worry about how to make it secure. but i think there's sort of a change in the mind that where we really want to start designing security at the beginning.
i went over to speak at a conference and he wanted to see me, so i thought it was a courtesy call and i thought it was going to last 10 minutes. it lasted two and a half hours. at one point, this prime minister said come and did you see what he did come and sit at the same conference table as close as you at night. he stood up and he said he took president montenegro and all he said was old duce. not a joke. not a joke. that's what people are thinking. that is what people are thinking. violating the norms of personal contract generates more anxiety and fear than any policy prescription that this president has enunciated. but to some degree, the politics today is the manifestation of the politics that's been brewing for a long time.
i mean, i remember the bork hearings. i remember you were on the committee. you saw a rocket and how they were and then you went through an impeachment and then we went through, you know, the republican revolution and then we saw jim wright be driven out and then we saw the republicans win the house for the first time in 40 years and the democrats kind of said no, you never won. we are going to just bite you. it is really a pox on both houses. you are right about that guy who yelled at the president, you lie and here's the ironic thing, the next they put out a fund-raising letter to raise money off of it. so, the system itself has been breaking down because of base politics.
>> the c-span bus is traveling across the country. we recently stopped in austin, texas, asking folks the most important issue in their state. >> in texas, the most important thing to me as i was hoping texas would get rid of unnecessary and burdensome occupational regulation. >> i believe the most important issue is tax reform. we have an outdated tax system are ready to get that changed so every american can have the best opportunity possible. >> one of the most important issues, possibly the most important issue facing texans in washington is transparency in government. i don't think there can be enough of that and i don't think they could ever do enough to be more transparent in not only their own neck cavities and behavior, but i think i'll save that time of records that are
>> next on c-span2, we take you live to the hudson institute in washington d.c. for a conversation on the political situation in argentina following the recent midterm election therapy we will hear from foreign-policy scholars about the legacy of wine and eva peron and mauricio mockery who took office in 2015. the discussion should get underway shortly. [inaudible conversations] [inaudible conversations]
[inaudible conversations] [inaudible conversations] >> argentina recently held midterm elections and a discussion this afternoon at the hudson institute in washington on what's ahead. foreign-policy scholars will talk about the legacy of juan and eva peron and the presidency of president macri who took office in 2015. the discussion should get underway shortly. a nation of argentina focused largely on the story of the argentine submarine, the navy subreports been missing for nearly a week. seen in reporting the submarine may soon run out of oxygen if it hasn't surface. countries maybe think the