Centre for Internet and Society

Openness

praskrishna — 2015-09-18T01:43:09Z

Openness

For more details visit http://editors.cis-india.org/home-images/copy_of_Openness.png

Openness

praskrishna — 2014-05-22T06:41:28Z

Openness Poster

For more details visit http://editors.cis-india.org/home-images/Openness.png

OpenData Week in Madrid - OD4D Summit, Open Data Charter Meetings, and IODC16

praskrishna — 2016-10-16T03:11:54Z

Sumandro Chattopadhyay took part in three open data events in Madrid in the first week of October 2016.

OD4D Summit

Sumandro Chattopadhyay has been a member of the Open Data Research Network (funded by IDRC), which is now part of the Open Data for Development (OD4D) Network. The Network completed 2 years and held its first summit on October 3, 2016. The event was organized by IDRC. Participants discussed the way forward for the Network. Among other things the need for regional cooperation in open data policies and practices in the South, South East, and East Asia was noted.

Open Data Charter Meeting

Sumandro represented CIS in the Open Data Charter Lead Stewards' meeting held on October 5, 2016. The meeting was focused on finalising the business plan of the Charter for 2017-2020, including setting up a secretariat for coordinating and leading the work. The document was thoroughly discussed and will be revised further by the Lead Stewards during the next month, before sharing the draft version with the General Stewards in mid-November.

A meeting was held with the General Stewards and other participants on the evening of the same day. For more info, click here.

IODC 16

The 4th International Open Data Conference (IODC 16) organized by red.es, IDRC, the World Bank and Open Data in Madrid on October 6 and 7, 2016 brought out a lot of real concerns, sometimes even slightly bitter and worried, about the actual state of open data across the world and the relevance/implications of open data for various stakeholders. More info on IODC here.

Sumandro spoke at the Regional Talk session focusing on Asia. He spoke on Opening Data for innovation: from supply-driven to demand-driven Open Data strategies and moderated the session on demand-driven open data strategies.

Collected tweets from IODC can be accessed here.

For more details visit http://editors.cis-india.org/openness/news/opendata-week-in-madrid-od4d-summit-open-data-charter-meetings-and-iodc16

Open Systems Interconnection Model

praskrishna — 2013-05-22T06:41:44Z

For more details visit http://editors.cis-india.org/telecom/blog/osi-model.pdf

Open Standards: Ensuring Accessibility and Inclusiveness

praskrishna — 2011-04-05T03:58:25Z

The Centre for Internet and Society is co-organising a workshop on Open Standards at the Internet Governance Forum on 16 September, 2010.

The Dynamic Coalition on Open Standards and the Dynamic Coalition on Accessibility and Disabilities have a shared interest on ensuring accessibility of information for all.

Persons with disabilities often find that the audio captioning system for a particular video format does not work with others video formats (requiring re-captioning). Or that the proprietary font standard used by their government cannot be read by their screen-reader.

The principle of inclusion also requires us to ensure that persons who choose non-dominant operating systems and software are not artificially kept out of enjoying the benefits of the World Wide Web.

While it is recognized that open standards are not a sufficient guarantor of accessibility, both DCOS and DCAD believe open standards are a prerequisite. A World Wide Web based on proprietary formats would not be able to deliver an accessible experience to those with disabilities.

This workshop seeks to look at the interface between open standards and accessibility for persons with disabilities and how such standards are important for safeguarding their rights. It would also seek to find ways to promote open standards from this perspective.

Which of the five broad IGF Themes or the Cross-Cutting Priorities does your workshop fall under?
Security, Openness and Privacy

Have you organized an IGF workshop before? Yes
If so, please provide the link to the report:

http://www.intgovforum.org/cms/index.php/component/chronocontact/?chronoformname=Workshopsreports2009View&curr=1&wr=94

Provide the names and affiliations of the panellists you are planning to invite:
People who are planned to be invited are:

Catherine Trautmann (MEP)
Eddan Katz (Electronic Frotier Foundation)
Nasser Kettani (Microsoft)
Shadi Abou-Zara (World Wide Web Consortium)
Vint Cerf (Father of the Internet)
Wilfried Grommen (Microsoft)

Biographies:
There are no panelists biographies associated to this workshop at the moment.

Provide the name of the organizer(s) of the workshop and their affiliation to various stakeholder groups:
Centre for Internet and Society (Civil Society) / World Wide Web Consortium (Technical Body)

Organization:Centre for Internet and Society
Contact Person: Pranesh Prakash

For more details visit http://editors.cis-india.org/events/open-standards

Open Standards Poster

praskrishna — 2013-09-24T08:30:35Z

For more details visit http://editors.cis-india.org/openness/blog-old/open-standards-poster.pdf

Open standards policy in India: A long, but successful journey

praskrishna — 2011-04-02T07:40:53Z

Last week, India became another major country to join the growing, global open standards movement. After three years of intense debate and discussion, India's Department of IT in India finalized its Policy on Open Standards for e-Governance, joining the ranks of emerging economies like Brazil, South Africa and others. This is a historic moment and India's Department of Information Technology (DIT) deserves congratulations for approving a policy that will ensure the long-term preservation of India's e-government data.

A major victory for the Open Source community is that the policy now says, "4.1.2 The Patent claims necessary to implement the Identified Standard shall be made available on a Royalty-Free basis for the life time of the Standard."

This victory is really important to the open source community because open source and open standards have a symbiotic relationship. While open source is the freedom to modify, share and redistribute software source code, open standards refer to the freedom to encode and decode data and network protocols. One freedom without the other is a limited freedom.

In the Indian policy, proprietary software vendors wanted to define open standards in such a way that even royalty-based standards would be included. Due to stiff opposition from the free and open source software community, Civil Society Organizations (CSOs), academia and others, this proposal was rolled back.

Under the National e-Government Action Plan, the Indian government is spending more than 10 billion dollars on e-governance. Some of the largest greenfield e-governance projects are in India. For example, one project aims to give a unique ID to more than 700 million Indians. Given the scale and scope of e-governance in India, the storage, archival and retrieval of e-governance data is a critical state responsibility. The standards selected by India also have global implications because the sheer volumes of usage in India, could make those standards the most popular standards in the world.

It must be remembered that while software changes every few years, the underlying data (birth and death records, census data, tax data etc.) is fairly static and might have to be preserved for centuries. If the government stores its data in a closed format, it could permanently lose access to that data if the owner of that format goes out of business or refuses to provide access to that format. If the government stores its data in proprietary formats that require royalty payments, the negotiation power of the vendor goes up as more and more data is stored in that proprietary format; a situation that no sovereign power should tolerate.

The Indian policy also states that a single open standard will be used for e-governance. This clause is also extremely important. For example, if a Central Government Ministry requests a certain set of information from state governments in India, and each state government submits the data in a different format, enormous amounts of time will be wasted in converting the data into a common format. There is also risk that data could be lost in the process of converting data from one format to another. Therefore, the usage of a single, open standard for an application area is the backbone that will unify these applications and enable the sharing of data across different applications. This will drive more efficiency in e-governance enabling policy makers and e-government practitioners to quickly pull together data from different government departments and take more informed decisions.

It was a very tough fight and the proprietary vendors used their market clout and strong field presence in their attempts to subvert open standards. For example, in the previous draft policy dated 25/11/2009, the wordings of the key section read,

"4.1.2 The essential patent claims necessary to implement the Identified Standard should preferably be available on a Royalty-Free (no payment and no restrictions) basis for the life time of the standard. However, if such Standards are not found feasible and in the wider public interest, then RF on Fair, Reasonable and Non Discriminatory terms and conditions (FRAND) or Reasonable and Non Discriminatory terms and conditions (RAND) could be considered."

Commenting on the final policy, veteran journalist, Glyn Moody said, “As you can see, there is no room for doubt here, no quibbling with 'RF on Fair, Reasonable and Non Discriminatory terms and conditions (FRAND)' or 'Reasonable and Non Discriminatory terms and conditions (RAND)' as the earlier version suggested: just a clear and simple 'Royalty-Free basis for the life time of the Standard'.”

So how did the Free and Open Source Software (FOSS) community succeed against tremendous odds? Some key actions that helped us succeed are:

   1. We worked long and hard to educate the public and the media. At first, some journalists shied away from writing on this subject because they found it too arcane and complex. It took over six months of talking to mediapersons before one of the mainstream publications carried an article on open standards. Once that happened, the dam broke and other publications also started to write about this “arcane” subject.
   2. The academic community, especially in the prestigious Indian academic institutions, were very supportive of open standards. Many academicians have influential positions on government committees and their support helped.
   3. India has a very vibrant set of Civil Society Organizations. The FOSS community worked with leading CSOs like IT For Change, Center for Internet and Society, Knowledge Commons and others that are founded by people who have tremendous experience in working on technology policy issues. A loose-knit coalition was formed under the title of FOSSCOMM and some excellent representations were made to the Indian government.
   4. Many sections within government itself were firmly in favor of open standards and the community worked closely with them.
   5. The community made common cause with sections of industry that supported open standards. This helped counter the pressure from industry associations that were supporting proprietary standards.

It was a long but extremely rewarding issue to be involved in and I am documenting this in the hope that other countries can benefit from the experiences we gained in fighting for open standards in India. Jai Ho! (May you be victorious!)

Read the original here

For more details visit http://editors.cis-india.org/news/open-standards-policy

Open Spectrum for Development India Case Study

praskrishna — 2012-07-26T08:17:15Z

This report is authored by Shyam Ponappa and jointly produced by APC and CIS.

For more details visit http://editors.cis-india.org/telecom/publications/india-untapped-potential

Open Spectrum for Development in the Context of the Digital Migration

praskrishna — 2011-10-13T01:14:26Z

Concise Description:

While the communication technologies that use the radio spectrum continue to develop at a brisk pace, our general approach to regulating the spectrum has not changed much since the 1930s when the spectrum was regulated to a very high degree in order to assure that interference between signals would not occur. For this reason, frequencies are assigned for specific uses and overseen quite closely by national regulators as well as an international system of governance. However, as technology rapidly changes, approaches to managing the spectrum should change as well.

Around the world, countries are migrating their broadcast systems –in particular, television- from analogue transmitters and receivers to digital ones. Digital broadcasting utilises the spectrum more efficiently, generally allowing for more channels in the space where one analogue channel could exist. This provides opportunity for other uses of the freed spectrum.

This digital migration creates the opportunity for improving how spectrum can be used and regulated. In particular, for expanding internet access. For this opportunity to realise, new means should be built into all spectrum allocation regimes. Open spectrum is one approach to spectrum management that would allow various users to utilise parts of the spectrum that are available. Sharing the spectrum in such a way would create a “spectrum commons” and would require a simple set of rules for communicating with one another and making decisions. But even if some frequencies are set aside as commons, more transparent and clear ways to regulate the spectrum being used by all stakeholders -including broadcasters, mobile companies and the military- need to be set.

This workshop will be aimed at identifying current practices that are contributing to build the spectrum commons, as well as debating different perspectives on policy and regulatory issues involved in spectrum management and its impacts on development.

In this workshop we will explore alternative regulatory frameworks in different contexts and regions, considering how technological developments can shape the future of spectrum-based communication. Considering, in particular, the opportunities brought by the transition to digital broadcasting systems.

Which of the five broad IGF Themes or the Cross-Cutting Priorities does your workshop fall under?

Emerging Issues

Have you organized an IGF workshop before? Yes

If so, please provide the link to the report:

http://www.intgovforum.org/cms/component/chronocontact/?chronoformname=WSProposalsReports2010View&wspid=110

Provide the names and affiliations of the panellists you are planning to invite:

Moderator:

- Claire Sibthorpe, Maple Consulting Services, UK

Panelists:

Steve Song, Village Telco, South Africa
Muriuki Mureithi, Researcher, Summit Strategies ltd, Kenya
Carlos Afonso, Instituto NUPEF, Brazil
Willie Currie, Independent Communications Authority of South Africa, South Africa
Giacomo Mazzone, European Broadcasting Union, Switzerland
Sascha Meinrath, New America Foundation, USA
Paul Mitchell, Microsoft Corporation, USA

Remote moderator:

Henrik Almström, APC, South Africa

Provide the name of the organizer(s) of the workshop and their affiliation to various stakeholder groups:

Association for Progressive Communications (APC) (civil society)

KictaNet (multistakeholder network)

Balancing Act (private sector)

Centre for Internet and Society (civil society)

Organization:Association for Progressive Communications

Contact Person: Pablo Accuosto

Workshop Number 121

See the background paper here

See the details on IGF website here

For more details visit http://editors.cis-india.org/events/open-spectrum-for-development-in-the-context-of-the-digital-migration

Open Spectrum

praskrishna — 2012-06-25T04:04:44Z

For more details visit http://editors.cis-india.org/home-images/copy_of_apc.jpg

Open Spectrum

praskrishna — 2012-06-25T04:02:43Z

For more details visit http://editors.cis-india.org/home-images/apc.jpg

Open Source India 2015

praskrishna — 2015-12-15T07:46:46Z

The twelfth Open Source India event organized by EFY Group was held at NIMHANS Convention Centre in Bangalore on November 19 and 20, 2015. Subhashish Panigrahi attended the event for the first day.

Open Source India (OSI) is the premierconference in Asia targeted at nurturing and promoting the Open Source ecosystem in the subcontinent. Started as LinuxAsia in 2004, OSI has been at the helm of bringing together the Open Source industry and the community in the last 11 years. The 12th edition of OSI this year aimed to take this event a notch higher by focusing on the Open Source ecosystem in Asia, and more specifically, in India.

For more information see the brochure of the event. Schedule of the event on Day 1 here and Schedule of the event on Day 2 here.

For more details visit http://editors.cis-india.org/openness/news/open-source-india-2015

Open Source

praskrishna — 2021-11-29T15:08:33Z

Open Source

For more details visit http://editors.cis-india.org/home-images/OpenSource.png

Open sesame

praskrishna — 2015-09-25T01:31:49Z

The government’s email is shockingly vulnerable.

The article was published in the Hindu on September 22, 2015. CIS research on private email accounts is mentioned.

As the Centre moves towards smart cities and a Digital India, some critics have cited the country’s increased vulnerability to cyber attacks. To be sure, cyber threat groups could disrupt our infrastructure by taking control of many systems. Such attacks could be quite damaging. Yes, they are rare today, but are much more likely to arise in conjunction with traditional armed conflicts. Cyber criminal groups target Indian organisations on a daily basis.

Almost two years ago, the IT minister’s office triggered national outrage when it used a public email service for official communication. There was much hand-wringing about security practices in a ministry responsible for setting the technology direction (secure email policy) for the country. Then in December 2013, the Centre for Internet and Society revealed that up to 90 per cent of Indian government officials used private email accounts for professional purposes.

A big deal

Between then and now, we’ve read about a new email policy and revelations of several cyber attacks on government officials. And FireEye revealed a decade-long cyber espionage operation by a group we call ‘APT30’, which is likely to be sponsored by China. How did they break in? By sending targeted ‘spear-phish’ emails with malware attached.

Email doesn’t sound like a big deal. Most of us have been using it for over a decade, and think we know how to use it right. But when you’re in a position of authority with access to sensitive information, you shouldn’t leave it to chance.

Today, state-sponsored attackers craft these spear-phishing emails after considerable research. APT30 carefully researched their targets and crafted mails which would appear extremely relevant, with interesting content. The moment a victim would open an attachment, an exploit would secretly install a backdoor. Through that backdoor, groups can compromise the employee’s entire network and extricate sensitive data. Groups bent on destruction can deploy malware to destroy the data. They could also take control of systems managing infrastructure or industrial processes and create havoc.

Spear-phishing has an open rate of 70 per cent, while regular mass emails had an open rate of just 3 per cent. Email is the front- door for today’s threat groups. That’s why governments around the world are improving the security of their email systems to fend off these spear-phishing threats.

Public concerns

When government employees use webmail for official business, they trade away their security for convenience. The emails they receive are no longer screened by cyber security solutions, which detect advanced targeted email attacks before they reach the inbox. In addition, because people typically retrieve their webmail in a browser, attackers have a larger attack surface to exploit when carrying out their attacks. For example, attackers can coax victims to click on a link to a website, which delivers an exploit via Adobe Flash.

Webmail opens the door to threats that would otherwise have been intercepted. When our government employees use webmail for official business, they leave the front door wide open to threats. One of the best steps we can take towards improving our government’s cyber security defences is abandoning public email services.

The writer is a software architect at the cyber security firm FireEye

For more details visit http://editors.cis-india.org/internet-governance/news/the-hindu-september-22-2015-atul-kabra-open-sesame

Open Science Presentation at ICFOSS

praskrishna — 2014-12-28T01:41:37Z

For more details visit http://editors.cis-india.org/openness/blog-old/open-science.ppt