sg-whitespace-09/0023r01
Submission
February2009
Alex Reznik, InterDigitalSlide 1
Security Straw Poll ResultsDate: 2009-02-21
Name Affiliations Address Phone email Alex Reznik InterDigital 781, 3rd Ave.
King of Prussia, PA 19406, USA
610-878-5784 [email protected]
Authors:
sg-whitespace-09/0023r01
Submission
February 2009
Slide 2 Alex Reznik, InterDigital
Abstract
• This presentations summarizes the results of the straw poll distributed as part of the security ad-hoc.
sg-whitespace-09/0023r01
Submission
Straw Poll Yes No Abs. % yes
Should the SG propose support of techniques which identify/classify valid incumbents, malicious impersonators and non-incumbent technologies for White Space technologies?
6 0 0 100
Should the SG develop a list of specific techniques to identify/classify valid incumbents, malicious impersonators and non-incumbent technologies that 802 should consider?
5 1 0 83
Should the SG recommend that the WGs coordinate their efforts on low-layer security
5 1 0 83
Should the SG propose support of techniques that secure and attest the sensing and location measurements
6 0 0 100
Should the SG develop a list of specific techniques that secure and attest the sensing and location measurements?
4 2 0 66
Should the SG recommend that the WGs coordinate their efforts on sending and location measurements?
4 2 0 66
Should the SG propose support of techniques that protect database information?
5 0 1 100
Should the SG propose that 802 investigate the need to provide support for techniques that attest to regulatory and standards compliance of TVBD devices?
3 5 0 38
Straw Poll ResultsFebruary 2009
Slide 3 Alex Reznik, InterDigital
