[Fiware-security] FI:WARE: Security- report of actions and work to be performed

[GIDOIN Daniel]

Dear All ,

You  will find bellow the report of my actions and the work you must perform in the end of this month.

- integration of the final version of the  Deliverable on 3rd Party Innovation Enablement in FI-WARE by Juanjo today., after final revisions by me.

- Technical Roadmap: (see the mail of Juanjo "[Fiware-wpa] Resubmission of FI-WARE Technical Roadmap" 13/08/2012 09:15)
 " In order to complete the picture, don't miss that one remaining task would be that of updating the Stakeholder field in each backlog entry linked to an Epic or Feature published on the wiki.   I would suggest using "FI-WARE" in the case this is a need identified by us, instead of naming a specific partner of FI-WARE.  This will avoid questions like "Is only xxx the partner in FI-WARE asking for this feature ?".   You can keep information about the specific company that proposed the feature by using the field "Owner".     You should also try to add the name of those UC projects that you know are also asking for that Epic or Feature (thanks to interaction during/after the educational weeks).    We will nevertheless ask the UC projects to list themselves in the Stakeholder field on another track (but this once we have published the new contents of the Technical Roadmap with the tables of Epics and Features)"
I introduce the modifications concerning the Stakeholder and owner fields for all Epics, features, User Stories and for all Generic Enablers.
Thank to everyone to check the owner field and rectify if necessary, for your Generic Enablers

-Abstract of the Juanjo mail: "I would kindly ask you to carry out a revision of the tracker of your chapter to make sure it gets aligned with what is currently on the Wiki, thus we can start from a new page in September:
*             Some of the Epics/Features may have changed, so please translate whatever change on the tracker
Make sure that Release Ids (numbering) is ok.   I remind you the conventions at http://forge.fi-ware.eu/plugins/mediawiki/wiki/fiware/index.php/Releases_and_Sprints_numbering,_with_mapping_to_calendar_dates »
I make the job for my trackers with the revision of the Fiware Releases and Sprint fields.
I reassigned the ID next :
ID 598 FIWARE.Epic.Security.Security Monitoring.Normalization of heterogeneous events and correlation reassigned to Antonio Garcia
ID 725 FIWARE.Feature.Security.Security Monitoring.Counter-measures reassigned to Philippe Leleu
ID 710 FIWARE.Epic.Security.Security Monitoring.Decision making support reassigned to Philippe Leleu
ID 711  FIWARE.Epic.Security.Security Monitoring.Visualization and reporting   reassigned to Adrian Waller
ID 714  FIWARE.Feature.Security.Security Monitoring.Sensitive-Data_Event-Management reassigned to Philippe Leleu
ID 886  FIWARE.Epic.Security.Context-based security and compliance.Rules reassigned to Antonio Garcia
ID 726  FIWARE.Feature.Security.Security Monitoring.Visualisation reassigned to Adrian Waller
ID 1791  FIWARE.Epic.Security.Security Monitoring.Business Continuity under Attack reassigned to philippe Leleu
In the backlog, thank lot to everyone in charge of any  EPICs, FEATUREs, USER STORIES (to see the field "Assigned to"" ) to fill in the "FI-WARE Release Id" and "FI-WARE Sprint Id" fields and when this was done, to check their consistency with the roadmap

Abstract of Juanjo mail:"

·         Regarding contribution of the Security chapter:

o   Please use references to wiki pages on the public wiki (built using the notation '[[<name of wiki page>]]') instead of hyperlinks

o   put a CR after the table to avoid it to be displayed too close to the following header (this will be done by adding '<br/>' right after the table, check Apps Chapter) "
It seems correct, but thank you to GE managers to take a look

Architecture and Open Specifications peer-reviews
Juanjo sent an email with assigned peer-reviews and target dates to provide comments.  ("Fiware-wpa] [Suspected Spam] Peer review of contents linked to FI-WARE Architecture Description" 13/08/2012 09:27)
AP - all WPLs to carry out the plan involving the necessary people.   Architecture peer-review should be mostly carried out by WPAs while it was recommended that review of Open Specifications be carried out by people with experience in RESTful specifications.
We should try to do our best to get the FI-WARE Architecture Description resubmitted by end of August.

  Please find the plan that I would like to follow to carry out this revision.   It is basically the same schema proposed for peer-review of FI-WARE Open Specifications:

Chapter to be reviewed

Reviewing chapter

Data

Security

Cloud

Data

Apps

Cloud

IoT

Apps

I2ND

IoT

Security

I2ND


Who among you could help me in this task next week? thank you in advance for your support

Best regards

Daniel


De : GIDOIN Daniel
Envoyé : jeudi 23 août 2012 18:25
À : fiware-security at lists.fi-ware.eu
Cc : BISSON Pascal
Objet : Call conf

Dear All,

I propose to postpone the audio conference tomorrow morning. Thursday, August 30 right for you? (preferably at Friday, August 31)
  I send you a message tomorrow to report the actions that I have done these last few days and to remember the actions you must perform in the end of the month.
I currently also serious problems of access to internet with a serious breakdown of servers and disks flooded by a sprinkler in the computer room (heat wave => overheating of the air conditioners ...)

Best regards

Daniel


-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <https://lists.fiware.org/private/old-fiware-security/attachments/20120824/d73339eb/attachment.html>