Talk:Stress testing the multistakeholder model in cybersecurity – WS 09 2017: Difference between revisions

From EuroDIG Wiki
Jump to navigation Jump to search
(Created page with " First call: March 23, 14.30 UTC (ISOC to set up the call) Minutes to be shared with this group and then with Eurodig Community on the wiki Second Call: April 21, 14.30 UTC (...")
 
No edit summary
Line 1: Line 1:
== 23. March 2017 - Call No. 1, minutes ==


First call: March 23, 14.30 UTC (ISOC to set up the call)
Minutes to be shared with this group and then with Eurodig Community on the wiki


Second Call: April 21, 14.30 UTC (ISOC to set up the call)
'''Participants:'''
 
Focal Point: Frédéric Donck/Ceren Ünal (ISOC),
SME: Tatiana Tropina,
Farzaneh Badiei (Badii),
Oriana Sula,
Fotjon Kosta
 
'''Session description/Suggested titles:'''
 
*Stress testing the multistakeholder model in cybersecurity
*Does Cybersecurity fit with the MS model and how to test it?
 
'''Agreed Format for the session:'''
 
No panel. A roundtable, discussants and key participants(*) + 2 moderators (and a remote moderator)
(*)key participants: selection of experts that shall be acting as resources for the moderator(s)
 
'''Further reading:'''
 
[http://www.internetsociety.org/collaborativesecurity/ Internet Society: Collaborative Security]
'''Summary:'''
 
*Re: the content of the session, a consensus was reached on focusing on multistakeholderism in cybersecurity governance and both the practical and policy tools to serve to that end.
*Potential key words and topics for discussion: “collaborative security” approach, analyzing different models of multistakeholderism, relationship with the PPP model, different levels of multistakeholderism (policy making/execution), multistakeholder IG in general and specific multistakeholder cybersecurity governance, concrete real life examples (i.e. 2016 October DdoS attack against Dyn), best and worst practices, position of governments on a multistakeholder cybersecurity governance model.
*RE: the session format, agreement not to go with the traditional panel format in order to spark interest and engage the audience in the discussion - Format suggestions: no panel on stage, instead 2/3 moderators: “key participants” as key resources for the moderators as they see fit during the conversation
 
'''ACTIONS:'''
 
1. Define Sessions teasers and keywords by April 1 (and up-date wiki accordingly)
*(Draft) Session teaser : «Turning crises into opportunity : a new take on cybersecurity governance and multistakeholderism»
*(Draft) Keywords: #collaborative security, #multistakeholderism, #relationship with the PPP model, #best and worst practices, #cybersecurity governance model
 
2. Each Member of the Org Team to prepare and present a list of potential “key participants” for this session as well as potential moderators/remote moderator/reporter.
Deadline: next call on 21 April 14:30 UTC
 
3. Next Meeting of the Org.Team: April 21, 14.30 UTC (ISOC to share the data for the call in due course)
 
 
== Call No. 2 ==
 
The second call is planned on April 21, 14.30 UTC (ISOC to set up the call).

Revision as of 17:06, 28 March 2017

23. March 2017 - Call No. 1, minutes

Participants:

Focal Point: Frédéric Donck/Ceren Ünal (ISOC), SME: Tatiana Tropina, Farzaneh Badiei (Badii), Oriana Sula, Fotjon Kosta

Session description/Suggested titles:

  • Stress testing the multistakeholder model in cybersecurity
  • Does Cybersecurity fit with the MS model and how to test it?

Agreed Format for the session:

No panel. A roundtable, discussants and key participants(*) + 2 moderators (and a remote moderator) (*)key participants: selection of experts that shall be acting as resources for the moderator(s)

Further reading:

Internet Society: Collaborative Security

Summary:

  • Re: the content of the session, a consensus was reached on focusing on multistakeholderism in cybersecurity governance and both the practical and policy tools to serve to that end.
  • Potential key words and topics for discussion: “collaborative security” approach, analyzing different models of multistakeholderism, relationship with the PPP model, different levels of multistakeholderism (policy making/execution), multistakeholder IG in general and specific multistakeholder cybersecurity governance, concrete real life examples (i.e. 2016 October DdoS attack against Dyn), best and worst practices, position of governments on a multistakeholder cybersecurity governance model.
  • RE: the session format, agreement not to go with the traditional panel format in order to spark interest and engage the audience in the discussion - Format suggestions: no panel on stage, instead 2/3 moderators: “key participants” as key resources for the moderators as they see fit during the conversation

ACTIONS:

1. Define Sessions teasers and keywords by April 1 (and up-date wiki accordingly)

  • (Draft) Session teaser : «Turning crises into opportunity : a new take on cybersecurity governance and multistakeholderism»
  • (Draft) Keywords: #collaborative security, #multistakeholderism, #relationship with the PPP model, #best and worst practices, #cybersecurity governance model

2. Each Member of the Org Team to prepare and present a list of potential “key participants” for this session as well as potential moderators/remote moderator/reporter. Deadline: next call on 21 April 14:30 UTC

3. Next Meeting of the Org.Team: April 21, 14.30 UTC (ISOC to share the data for the call in due course)


Call No. 2

The second call is planned on April 21, 14.30 UTC (ISOC to set up the call).

Retrieved from "https://eurodigwiki.org/mw/index.php?title=Talk:Stress_testing_the_multistakeholder_model_in_cybersecurity_–_WS_09_2017&oldid=8980"