[SPARTA - bodies.dissemination-committee] SPARTA Dissemination procedure (IPR) - Fast track
23 Apr
23 Apr
6:52 p.m.
Hi all,
I like the proposed procedure, especially the fast track.
Jan
23. 4. 2019 v 20:39, Nelson Escravana <nelson.escravana(a)inov.pt>pt>:
Dear members of the Dissemination Committee (aka
Dissemination Task Force),
I'm bringing to your attention a proposal to initiate an amendment to the consortium
agreement (CA).
Accordingly to the Grant Agreement 29.1:
A beneficiary that intends to disseminate its results must give advance notice to the
other beneficiaries of — unless agreed otherwise — at least 45 days, together with
sufficient information on the results it will disseminate.
Accordingly to the CA 8.4.2:
Prior notice of any planned publication, including complete draft of the publication,
shall be submitted to the Dissemination Taskforce at least 30 calendar days before the
submission. Any objection to the planned publication shall be made in accordance with the
Grant Agreement in writing to the Coordinator and to the Party or Parties proposing the
dissemination within 14 calendar days after receipt of the notice. If no objection is made
within the time limit stated above, the publication shall be deemed permitted.
Within this scope the Dissemination Committee should include a representative from every
partner.
It has been raised by several partners that this timings are incompatible with the normal
processes associated with scientific publications. For that matter a fast track process
has been proposed by CEA and discussed in the last WP12 call. Given that we will all need
to agree on the process, so we can proposed it to the GA. I'm requesting your feedback
on this.
Following up on some discussion with CEA on the subject (their proposal attached) the
main ideas are:
- authors send to the dissemination committee in current draft state 30 days before
submission deadline with statement: additional IP / security sensitive material expected
to be added (Full Track) or not expect to be added (Fast Track);
- if sensitive material in the draft, dissemination committee may object within 14 days
(as currently in the CA);
- if sensitive material is expected to be added (or already in the draft), paper needs to
be in re-submitted the final version 10 days before for a complementary round by
Dissemination committee. The dissemination committee, may reject the document within 8
days (I would say, only if new material was added).
- if no sensitive material is expected to be added (Fast Track), submitted paper is sent
after submission to Dissemination committee. The dissemination committee, may reject the
document within 14 days, and the author will be required to withdraw the paper (retract).
Please provide your comments and ideas on this by the end of next week (if you agree,
please also let me know). So we can compile a version which we all agree.
Kind regards,
Nelson
--
Nelson Escravana
Director
Communications & Cybersecurity
Member of the Board of Directors
INOV - INESC Inovação
Rua Alves Redol, nr. 9
1000-029 Lisboa
Portugal
Tel.: + 351 21 310 0476
Fax: + 351 21 310 0445
This e-mail and its attachments may contain confidential and/or privileged information.
If you are not the intended recipient you must not use, distribute or reproduce this
e-mail.
I try to read e-mail from once to four times every business day. If you need an urgent
reply to a message, please contact me by phone.
<Dissemination committee process.pdf>
--
bodies.dissemination-committee mailing list
bodies.dissemination-committee(a)server.sparta.eu
http://server.sparta.eu/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/bodies.dissemination-commi…
8:10 p.m.
Dear Nelson,
I like the procedures mentioned and agreed (signed) by all partners
already in CA.
"Prior notice of any planned publication, including complete draft of the
publication, shall be submitted to the Dissemination Taskforce at least 30
calendar days before the submission. Any objection to the planned
publication shall be made in accordance with the Grant Agreement in
writing to the Coordinator and to the Party or Parties proposing the
dissemination within 14 calendar days after receipt of the notice. If no
objection is made within the time limit stated above, the publication
shall be deemed permitted.
I do not think any changes are needed and that timings are incompatibile
(in fact, those work in most of the projects).
Kind Regards,
prof. Michal Choras
<html>
<head>
<meta http-equiv="content-type" content="text/html;
charset=utf-8">
</head>
<body text="#000000" bgcolor="#FFFFFF">
<p>Dear members of the Dissemination Committee (aka Dissemination
Task Force),</p>
<p>I'm bringing to your attention a proposal to initiate an
amendment to the <span lang="EN-US">consortium agreement
(CA).<br>
</span></p>
<p><font color="#000099">Accordingly to the Grant Agreement
29.1:</font></p>
<p><font color="#000099">A beneficiary that intends to
disseminate
its results must give advance notice to the other beneficiaries
of ? <b>unless agreed otherwise</b> ? at least 45 days,
together with sufficient information on the results it will
disseminate.</font></p>
<p><font color="#000099">Accordingly to the CA
8.4.2:</font></p>
<p><font color="#000099">Prior notice of <b>any planned
publication</b>,
including complete draft of the publication, shall be submitted
to the Dissemination Taskforce <b>at least 30 calendar days
before the submission</b>. Any objection to the planned
publication shall be made in accordance with the Grant Agreement
in writing to the Coordinator and to the Party or Parties
proposing the dissemination within 14 calendar days after
receipt of the notice. If no objection is made within the time
limit stated above, the publication shall be deemed
permitted.</font></p>
<p>Within this scope the Dissemination Committee should include a
representative from every partner.<br>
</p>
<p>It has been raised by several partners that this timings are
incompatible with the normal processes associated with scientific
publications. For that matter a fast track process has been
proposed by CEA and discussed in the last WP12 call. Given that we
will all need to agree on the process, so we can proposed it to
the GA. I'm requesting your feedback on this.<br>
</p>
<p>Following up on some discussion with CEA on the subject (their
proposal attached) the main ideas are:</p>
<p>- authors send to the dissemination committee in current draft
state 30 days before submission deadline with statement:
additional IP / security sensitive material expected to be added
(Full Track) <b>or </b>not expect to be added (Fast Track);<br>
</p>
<p>- if sensitive material in the draft, dissemination committee may
object within 14 days (as currently in the CA);</p>
<p>- if sensitive material is expected to be added (or already in
the draft), paper needs to be in re-submitted the final version 10
days before for a complementary round by Dissemination committee.
The dissemination committee, may reject the document within 8 days
(I would say, only if new material was added).<br>
<br>
- if no sensitive material is expected to be added (Fast Track),
submitted paper is sent <b>after submission </b>to Dissemination
committee. The dissemination committee, may reject the document
within 14 days, <b>and the author will be required to withdraw
the paper</b> (retract).<br>
</p>
Please provide your comments and ideas on this by the end of next
week (if you agree, please also let <b>me</b> know). So we can
compile a version which we all agree.<br>
<br>
Kind regards,<br>
Nelson<br>
<p><br>
</p>
<pre class="moz-signature" cols="999999">--
Nelson Escravana
Director
Communications & Cybersecurity
Member of the Board of Directors
INOV - INESC Inovaç?o
Rua Alves Redol, nr. 9
1000-029 Lisboa
Portugal
Tel.: + 351 21 310 0476
Fax: + 351 21 310 0445
This e-mail and its attachments may contain confidential and/or privileged
information. If you are not the intended recipient you must not use,
distribute or reproduce this e-mail.
I try to read e-mail from once to four times every business day. If you
need an urgent reply to a message, please contact me by phone.
</pre>
</body>
</html>
--
bodies.dissemination-committee mailing list
bodies.dissemination-committee(a)server.sparta.eu
http://server.sparta.eu/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/bodies.dissemination-commi…
8:44 p.m.
Dear Nelson and all,
I believe the fast track is indeed needed. Quite often we don’t have a reasonable draft 1
month before the deadline. The distinction between adding or not sensitive material makes
sense.
Best,
Miguel Correia
On 23 Apr 2019, at 19:39, Nelson Escravana
<nelson.escravana(a)inov.pt> wrote:
Dear members of the Dissemination Committee (aka Dissemination Task Force),
I'm bringing to your attention a proposal to initiate an amendment to the consortium
agreement (CA).
Accordingly to the Grant Agreement 29.1:
A beneficiary that intends to disseminate its results must give advance notice to the
other beneficiaries of — unless agreed otherwise — at least 45 days, together with
sufficient information on the results it will disseminate.
Accordingly to the CA 8.4.2:
Prior notice of any planned publication, including complete draft of the publication,
shall be submitted to the Dissemination Taskforce at least 30 calendar days before the
submission. Any objection to the planned publication shall be made in accordance with the
Grant Agreement in writing to the Coordinator and to the Party or Parties proposing the
dissemination within 14 calendar days after receipt of the notice. If no objection is made
within the time limit stated above, the publication shall be deemed permitted.
Within this scope the Dissemination Committee should include a representative from every
partner.
It has been raised by several partners that this timings are incompatible with the normal
processes associated with scientific publications. For that matter a fast track process
has been proposed by CEA and discussed in the last WP12 call. Given that we will all need
to agree on the process, so we can proposed it to the GA. I'm requesting your feedback
on this.
Following up on some discussion with CEA on the subject (their proposal attached) the
main ideas are:
- authors send to the dissemination committee in current draft state 30 days before
submission deadline with statement: additional IP / security sensitive material expected
to be added (Full Track) or not expect to be added (Fast Track);
- if sensitive material in the draft, dissemination committee may object within 14 days
(as currently in the CA);
- if sensitive material is expected to be added (or already in the draft), paper needs to
be in re-submitted the final version 10 days before for a complementary round by
Dissemination committee. The dissemination committee, may reject the document within 8
days (I would say, only if new material was added).
- if no sensitive material is expected to be added (Fast Track), submitted paper is sent
after submission to Dissemination committee. The dissemination committee, may reject the
document within 14 days, and the author will be required to withdraw the paper (retract).
Please provide your comments and ideas on this by the end of next week (if you agree,
please also let me know). So we can compile a version which we all agree.
Kind regards,
Nelson
--
Nelson Escravana
Director
Communications & Cybersecurity
Member of the Board of Directors
INOV - INESC Inovação
Rua Alves Redol, nr. 9
1000-029 Lisboa
Portugal
Tel.: + 351 21 310 0476
Fax: + 351 21 310 0445
This e-mail and its attachments may contain confidential and/or privileged information.
If you are not the intended recipient you must not use, distribute or reproduce this
e-mail.
I try to read e-mail from once to four times every business day. If you need an urgent
reply to a message, please contact me by phone.
<Dissemination committee process.pdf>--
bodies.dissemination-committee mailing list
bodies.dissemination-committee(a)server.sparta.eu
http://server.sparta.eu/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/bodies.dissemination-commi…
9:41 p.m.
Dear Nelson,
Thank you for your effort in changing the dissemination procedure, that
UBO supports so far.
On 23.04.19 20:39, Nelson Escravana wrote:
- if no sensitive material is expected to be added
(Fast Track),
submitted paper is sent *after submission *to Dissemination committee.
The dissemination committee, may reject the document within 14 days,
*and the author will be required to withdraw the paper* (retract).
This means some risk for the authors and withdrawal might not always be
necessary. Maybe we should add something like "and the author will be
required to remove the criticized sensitive information from a camera
ready version of the paper if possible or withdraw the paper entirely."
Best,
Michael
Am 23.04.2019 um 20:39 schrieb Nelson Escravana:
> Dear members of the Dissemination Committee (aka Dissemination Task Force),
>
> I'm bringing to your attention a proposal to initiate an amendment to
> the consortium agreement (CA).
>
> Accordingly to the Grant Agreement 29.1:
>
> A beneficiary that intends to disseminate its results must give advance
> notice to the other beneficiaries of — *unless agreed otherwise* — at
> least 45 days, together with sufficient information on the results it
> will disseminate.
>
> Accordingly to the CA 8.4.2:
>
> Prior notice of *any planned publication*, including complete draft of
> the publication, shall be submitted to the Dissemination Taskforce *at
> least 30 calendar days before the submission*. Any objection to the
> planned publication shall be made in accordance with the Grant Agreement
> in writing to the Coordinator and to the Party or Parties proposing the
> dissemination within 14 calendar days after receipt of the notice. If no
> objection is made within the time limit stated above, the publication
> shall be deemed permitted.
>
> Within this scope the Dissemination Committee should include a
> representative from every partner.
>
> It has been raised by several partners that this timings are
> incompatible with the normal processes associated with scientific
> publications. For that matter a fast track process has been proposed by
> CEA and discussed in the last WP12 call. Given that we will all need to
> agree on the process, so we can proposed it to the GA. I'm requesting
> your feedback on this.
>
> Following up on some discussion with CEA on the subject (their proposal
> attached) the main ideas are:
>
> - authors send to the dissemination committee in current draft state 30
> days before submission deadline with statement: additional IP / security
> sensitive material expected to be added (Full Track) *or *not expect to
> be added (Fast Track);
>
> - if sensitive material in the draft, dissemination committee may object
> within 14 days (as currently in the CA);
>
> - if sensitive material is expected to be added (or already in the
> draft), paper needs to be in re-submitted the final version 10 days
> before for a complementary round by Dissemination committee. The
> dissemination committee, may reject the document within 8 days (I would
> say, only if new material was added).
>
- if no sensitive material is expected to be added
(Fast Track),
submitted paper is sent *after submission *to Dissemination committee.
The dissemination committee, may reject the document within 14 days,
*and the author will be required to withdraw the paper* (retract).
>
> Please provide your comments and ideas on this by the end of next week
> (if you agree, please also let *me* know). So we can compile a version
> which we all agree.
>
> Kind regards,
> Nelson
>
>
> --
>
> Nelson Escravana
> Director
> Communications & Cybersecurity
> Member of the Board of Directors
>
> INOV - INESC Inovação
> Rua Alves Redol, nr. 9
> 1000-029 Lisboa
> Portugal
> Tel.: + 351 21 310 0476
> Fax: + 351 21 310 0445
>
> This e-mail and its attachments may contain confidential and/or privileged
information. If you are not the intended recipient you must not use, distribute or
reproduce this e-mail.
> I try to read e-mail from once to four times every business day. If you need an
urgent reply to a message, please contact me by phone.
>
>
--
--------------------------------------------------------------------
Prof. Dr. Michael Meier
!! neue Anschrift seit 1.3.2018 !!
University of Bonn | Tel./Fax: +49 228 73-54249 / -54254
CS 4 / IT Security | Email : mm(a)cs.uni-bonn.de
Endenicher Allee 19a | Web : https://net.cs.uni-bonn.de
D-53115 Bonn, Germany | Office : 1.019
Fraunhofer FKIE | Mobil : +49 170 9233839
Cyber Security | Email : michael.meier(a)fkie.fraunhofer.de
Fraunhoferstr. 20 | Web : https://www.fkie.fraunhofer.de
D-53343 Wachtberg |
24 Apr
24 Apr
6:42 a.m.
Dear Nelson,
Thank you for the proposed dissemination procedure, it looks very good and KEMEA supports
it.
Best regards,
Dimitris
[cid:37e7448e-f8c9-46b3-8303-28d60a61b821]
Dimitris Kavallieros
Research Associate
Center for Security Studies (KEMEA)
Hellenic Ministry of Citizen Protection
P. Kanellopoulou 4, 101 77 Athens, Greece
Tel:+30 2107710805<tel:+30%2021%200748%201630> (ext.399) Fax:+30
2111004499<tel:+30%2021%200748%201995> Email:<tel:+30%2021%200748%201995>
d.kavallieros@kemea-research.gr<mailto:d.kavallieros@kemea-research.gr> Web:
<mailto:d.kavallieros@kemea-research.gr>
www.kemea.gr<http://www.kemea.gr/index.php/en>
________________________________
From: bodies.dissemination-committee
<bodies.dissemination-committee-bounces(a)server.sparta.eu> on behalf of Michael Meier
<mm(a)cs.uni-bonn.de>
Sent: Wednesday, April 24, 2019 12:41:42 AM
To: bodies.dissemination-committee(a)server.sparta.eu
Subject: Re: [SPARTA - bodies.dissemination-committee] SPARTA Dissemination procedure
(IPR) - Fast track
Dear Nelson,
Thank you for your effort in changing the dissemination procedure, that
UBO supports so far.
On 23.04.19 20:39, Nelson Escravana wrote:
- if no sensitive material is expected to be added
(Fast Track),
submitted paper is sent *after submission *to Dissemination committee.
The dissemination committee, may reject the document within 14 days,
*and the author will be required to withdraw the paper* (retract).
This means some risk for the authors and withdrawal might not always be
necessary. Maybe we should add something like "and the author will be
required to remove the criticized sensitive information from a camera
ready version of the paper if possible or withdraw the paper entirely."
Best,
Michael
Am 23.04.2019 um 20:39 schrieb Nelson Escravana:
> Dear members of the Dissemination Committee (aka Dissemination Task Force),
>
> I'm bringing to your attention a proposal to initiate an amendment to
> the consortium agreement (CA).
>
> Accordingly to the Grant Agreement 29.1:
>
> A beneficiary that intends to disseminate its results must give advance
> notice to the other beneficiaries of — *unless agreed otherwise* — at
> least 45 days, together with sufficient information on the results it
> will disseminate.
>
> Accordingly to the CA 8.4.2:
>
> Prior notice of *any planned publication*, including complete draft of
> the publication, shall be submitted to the Dissemination Taskforce *at
> least 30 calendar days before the submission*. Any objection to the
> planned publication shall be made in accordance with the Grant Agreement
> in writing to the Coordinator and to the Party or Parties proposing the
> dissemination within 14 calendar days after receipt of the notice. If no
> objection is made within the time limit stated above, the publication
> shall be deemed permitted.
>
> Within this scope the Dissemination Committee should include a
> representative from every partner.
>
> It has been raised by several partners that this timings are
> incompatible with the normal processes associated with scientific
> publications. For that matter a fast track process has been proposed by
> CEA and discussed in the last WP12 call. Given that we will all need to
> agree on the process, so we can proposed it to the GA. I'm requesting
> your feedback on this.
>
> Following up on some discussion with CEA on the subject (their proposal
> attached) the main ideas are:
>
> - authors send to the dissemination committee in current draft state 30
> days before submission deadline with statement: additional IP / security
> sensitive material expected to be added (Full Track) *or *not expect to
> be added (Fast Track);
>
> - if sensitive material in the draft, dissemination committee may object
> within 14 days (as currently in the CA);
>
> - if sensitive material is expected to be added (or already in the
> draft), paper needs to be in re-submitted the final version 10 days
> before for a complementary round by Dissemination committee. The
> dissemination committee, may reject the document within 8 days (I would
> say, only if new material was added).
>
- if no sensitive material is expected to be added
(Fast Track),
submitted paper is sent *after submission *to Dissemination committee.
The dissemination committee, may reject the document within 14 days,
*and the author will be required to withdraw the paper* (retract).
>
> Please provide your comments and ideas on this by the end of next week
> (if you agree, please also let *me* know). So we can compile a version
> which we all agree.
>
> Kind regards,
> Nelson
>
>
> --
>
> Nelson Escravana
> Director
> Communications & Cybersecurity
> Member of the Board of Directors
>
> INOV - INESC Inovação
> Rua Alves Redol, nr. 9
> 1000-029 Lisboa
> Portugal
> Tel.: + 351 21 310 0476
> Fax: + 351 21 310 0445
>
> This e-mail and its attachments may contain confidential and/or privileged
information. If you are not the intended recipient you must not use, distribute or
reproduce this e-mail.
> I try to read e-mail from once to four times every business day. If you need an
urgent reply to a message, please contact me by phone.
>
>
--
--------------------------------------------------------------------
Prof. Dr. Michael Meier
!! neue Anschrift seit 1.3.2018 !!
University of Bonn | Tel./Fax: +49 228 73-54249 / -54254
CS 4 / IT Security | Email : mm(a)cs.uni-bonn.de
Endenicher Allee 19a | Web : https://net.cs.uni-bonn.de
D-53115 Bonn, Germany | Office : 1.019
Fraunhofer FKIE | Mobil : +49 170 9233839
Cyber Security | Email : michael.meier(a)fkie.fraunhofer.de
Fraunhoferstr. 20 | Web : https://www.fkie.fraunhofer.de
D-53343 Wachtberg |
--
bodies.dissemination-committee mailing list
bodies.dissemination-committee(a)server.sparta.eu
http://server.sparta.eu/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/bodies.dissemination-commi…
6:50 a.m.
Dear Nelson,
We (L3CE) believe, that Fast Track procedure is of high demand. We are
working in highly complex project involving lots of inter-dependencies
and to expect to have a reasonable draft 1.5 month in advance will be
very high pressure in most of the cases.
Best regards,
--
Evaldas Bruze/L3CE
T-Shark Programme Manager
2019-04-23 21:39, Nelson Escravana rašė:
Dear members of the Dissemination Committee (aka
Dissemination Task Force),
I'm bringing to your attention a proposal to initiate an amendment to the consortium
agreement (CA).
Accordingly to the Grant Agreement 29.1:
A beneficiary that intends to disseminate its results must give advance notice to the
other beneficiaries of -- UNLESS AGREED OTHERWISE -- at least 45 days, together with
sufficient information on the results it will disseminate.
Accordingly to the CA 8.4.2:
Prior notice of ANY PLANNED PUBLICATION, including complete draft of the publication,
shall be submitted to the Dissemination Taskforce AT LEAST 30 CALENDAR DAYS BEFORE THE
SUBMISSION. Any objection to the planned publication shall be made in accordance with the
Grant Agreement in writing to the Coordinator and to the Party or Parties proposing the
dissemination within 14 calendar days after receipt of the notice. If no objection is made
within the time limit stated above, the publication shall be deemed permitted.
Within this scope the Dissemination Committee should include a representative from every
partner.
It has been raised by several partners that this timings are incompatible with the normal
processes associated with scientific publications. For that matter a fast track process
has been proposed by CEA and discussed in the last WP12 call. Given that we will all need
to agree on the process, so we can proposed it to the GA. I'm requesting your feedback
on this.
Following up on some discussion with CEA on the subject (their proposal attached) the
main ideas are:
- authors send to the dissemination committee in current draft state 30 days before
submission deadline with statement: additional IP / security sensitive material expected
to be added (Full Track) OR not expect to be added (Fast Track);
- if sensitive material in the draft, dissemination committee may object within 14 days
(as currently in the CA);
- if sensitive material is expected to be added (or already in the draft), paper needs to
be in re-submitted the final version 10 days before for a complementary round by
Dissemination committee. The dissemination committee, may reject the document within 8
days (I would say, only if new material was added).
- if no sensitive material is expected to be added (Fast Track), submitted paper is sent
AFTER SUBMISSION to Dissemination committee. The dissemination committee, may reject the
document within 14 days, AND THE AUTHOR WILL BE REQUIRED TO WITHDRAW THE PAPER (retract).
Please provide your comments and ideas on this by the end of next week (if you agree,
please also let ME know). So we can compile a version which we all agree.
Kind regards,
Nelson
--
Nelson Escravana
Director
Communications & Cybersecurity
Member of the Board of Directors
INOV - INESC Inovação
Rua Alves Redol, nr. 9
1000-029 Lisboa
Portugal
Tel.: + 351 21 310 0476
Fax: + 351 21 310 0445
This e-mail and its attachments may contain confidential and/or privileged information.
If you are not the intended recipient you must not use, distribute or reproduce this
e-mail.
I try to read e-mail from once to four times every business day. If you need an urgent
reply to a message, please contact me by phone.
25 Apr
25 Apr
7:16 a.m.
Dear all,
may I ask for an even more lightweight process.
Though a fast track is a considerable improvement I still think, that the whole process is
still very complicated and poses risks that should be avoided. The dissemination process
generates considerable additional efforts, lacks transparency (e.g. I do not know who is
member of the mailing list), and even worse the risk of unintentional information
leakages (new ideas in unpublished papers are send around without control) is very high.
Can’t we manage the thing in an efficient and complete decentralized way: each partner
institution is responsible for publishing SPARTA papers only in compliance to the
publication rules of SPARTA. No overall dissemination procedure is needed at all.
Best regards
Claudia Eckert
--
Prof. Dr. Claudia Eckert
Fraunhofer-Institut für Angewandte und Integrierte Sicherheit (AISEC) Institutsleitung
Parkring 4, 85748 Garching bei München Tel. +49 89 3 22 99 86-285 Fax +49 89 3 22 99
86-299
e-mail:
claudia.eckert@aisec.fraunhofer.de<mailto:claudia.eckert@aisec.fraunhofer.de>
http://www.aisec.fraunhofer.de
Technische Universität München
Lehrstuhl für Sicherheit in der Informatik Fakultät für Informatik Boltzmannstr. 3
Tel.: +49 (0)89 289 18578
Fax: +49 (0)89 289 18579
85748 Garching, Germany
http://www.sec.in.tum.de
My signature is certified by Deutsche Telekom Root CA 2:
http://wwwca.telesec.de/cgi-bin/caservice/Common/InstallRoot/DT-Root-CA-2.d…
Von: bodies.dissemination-committee
<bodies.dissemination-committee-bounces(a)server.sparta.eu> Im Auftrag von
evaldas(a)l3ce.eu
Gesendet: Mittwoch, 24. April 2019 08:51
An: Nelson Escravana <nelson.escravana(a)inov.pt>
Cc: bodies.dissemination-committee(a)internal.sparta.eu; spartacomms(a)inov.pt
Betreff: Re: [SPARTA - bodies.dissemination-committee] SPARTA Dissemination procedure
(IPR) - Fast track
Dear Nelson,
We (L3CE) believe, that Fast Track procedure is of high demand. We are working in highly
complex project involving lots of inter-dependencies and to expect to have a reasonable
draft 1.5 month in advance will be very high pressure in most of the cases.
Best regards,
--
Evaldas Bruze/L3CE
T-Shark Programme Manager
2019-04-23 21:39, Nelson Escravana rašė:
Dear members of the Dissemination Committee (aka Dissemination Task Force),
I'm bringing to your attention a proposal to initiate an amendment to the consortium
agreement (CA).
Accordingly to the Grant Agreement 29.1:
A beneficiary that intends to disseminate its results must give advance notice to the
other beneficiaries of — unless agreed otherwise — at least 45 days, together with
sufficient information on the results it will disseminate.
Accordingly to the CA 8.4.2:
Prior notice of any planned publication, including complete draft of the publication,
shall be submitted to the Dissemination Taskforce at least 30 calendar days before the
submission. Any objection to the planned publication shall be made in accordance with the
Grant Agreement in writing to the Coordinator and to the Party or Parties proposing the
dissemination within 14 calendar days after receipt of the notice. If no objection is made
within the time limit stated above, the publication shall be deemed permitted.
Within this scope the Dissemination Committee should include a representative from every
partner.
It has been raised by several partners that this timings are incompatible with the normal
processes associated with scientific publications. For that matter a fast track process
has been proposed by CEA and discussed in the last WP12 call. Given that we will all need
to agree on the process, so we can proposed it to the GA. I'm requesting your feedback
on this.
Following up on some discussion with CEA on the subject (their proposal attached) the main
ideas are:
- authors send to the dissemination committee in current draft state 30 days before
submission deadline with statement: additional IP / security sensitive material expected
to be added (Full Track) or not expect to be added (Fast Track);
- if sensitive material in the draft, dissemination committee may object within 14 days
(as currently in the CA);
- if sensitive material is expected to be added (or already in the draft), paper needs to
be in re-submitted the final version 10 days before for a complementary round by
Dissemination committee. The dissemination committee, may reject the document within 8
days (I would say, only if new material was added).
- if no sensitive material is expected to be added (Fast Track), submitted paper is sent
after submission to Dissemination committee. The dissemination committee, may reject the
document within 14 days, and the author will be required to withdraw the paper
(retract).
Please provide your comments and ideas on this by the end of next week (if you agree,
please also let me know). So we can compile a version which we all agree.
Kind regards,
Nelson
--
Nelson Escravana
Director
Communications & Cybersecurity
Member of the Board of Directors
INOV - INESC Inovação
Rua Alves Redol, nr. 9
1000-029 Lisboa
Portugal
Tel.: + 351 21 310 0476
Fax: + 351 21 310 0445
This e-mail and its attachments may contain confidential and/or privileged information. If
you are not the intended recipient you must not use, distribute or reproduce this
e-mail.
I try to read e-mail from once to four times every business day. If you need an urgent
reply to a message, please contact me by phone.
7:40 a.m.
Hi,
We agree with Claudia that dissemination process is very complicated, long and poses
risks that should be avoided.
We also think that dissemination process can be decentralized: each partner institution is
responsible for publishing SPARTA papers only in compliance to the publication rules of
SPARTA.
No overall dissemination procedure is needed at all.
Algimantas Venčkauskas
From: bodies.dissemination-committee
<bodies.dissemination-committee-bounces(a)server.sparta.eu> On Behalf Of Eckert,
Claudia
Sent: Thursday, April 25, 2019 10:17 AM
To: evaldas(a)l3ce.eu; Nelson Escravana <nelson.escravana(a)inov.pt>
Cc: bodies.dissemination-committee(a)internal.sparta.eu; spartacomms(a)inov.pt
Subject: Re: [SPARTA - bodies.dissemination-committee] SPARTA Dissemination procedure
(IPR) - Fast track
Dear all,
may I ask for an even more lightweight process.
Though a fast track is a considerable improvement I still think, that the whole process is
still very complicated and poses risks that should be avoided. The dissemination process
generates considerable additional efforts, lacks transparency (e.g. I do not know who is
member of the mailing list), and even worse the risk of unintentional information
leakages (new ideas in unpublished papers are send around without control) is very high.
Can’t we manage the thing in an efficient and complete decentralized way: each partner
institution is responsible for publishing SPARTA papers only in compliance to the
publication rules of SPARTA. No overall dissemination procedure is needed at all.
Best regards
Claudia Eckert
--
Prof. Dr. Claudia Eckert
Fraunhofer-Institut für Angewandte und Integrierte Sicherheit (AISEC) Institutsleitung
Parkring 4, 85748 Garching bei München Tel. +49 89 3 22 99 86-285 Fax +49 89 3 22 99
86-299
e-mail:
claudia.eckert@aisec.fraunhofer.de<mailto:claudia.eckert@aisec.fraunhofer.de>
http://www.aisec.fraunhofer.de
Technische Universität München
Lehrstuhl für Sicherheit in der Informatik Fakultät für Informatik Boltzmannstr. 3
Tel.: +49 (0)89 289 18578
Fax: +49 (0)89 289 18579
85748 Garching, Germany
http://www.sec.in.tum.de
My signature is certified by Deutsche Telekom Root CA 2:
http://wwwca.telesec.de/cgi-bin/caservice/Common/InstallRoot/DT-Root-CA-2.d…
Von: bodies.dissemination-committee
<bodies.dissemination-committee-bounces@server.sparta.eu<mailto:bodies.dissemination-committee-bounces@server.sparta.eu>>
Im Auftrag von evaldas@l3ce.eu<mailto:evaldas@l3ce.eu>
Gesendet: Mittwoch, 24. April 2019 08:51
An: Nelson Escravana
<nelson.escravana@inov.pt<mailto:nelson.escravana@inov.pt>>
Cc:
bodies.dissemination-committee@internal.sparta.eu<mailto:bodies.dissemination-committee@internal.sparta.eu>;
spartacomms@inov.pt<mailto:spartacomms@inov.pt>
Betreff: Re: [SPARTA - bodies.dissemination-committee] SPARTA Dissemination procedure
(IPR) - Fast track
Dear Nelson,
We (L3CE) believe, that Fast Track procedure is of high demand. We are working in highly
complex project involving lots of inter-dependencies and to expect to have a reasonable
draft 1.5 month in advance will be very high pressure in most of the cases.
Best regards,
--
Evaldas Bruze/L3CE
T-Shark Programme Manager
2019-04-23 21:39, Nelson Escravana rašė:
Dear members of the Dissemination Committee (aka Dissemination Task Force),
I'm bringing to your attention a proposal to initiate an amendment to the consortium
agreement (CA).
Accordingly to the Grant Agreement 29.1:
A beneficiary that intends to disseminate its results must give advance notice to the
other beneficiaries of — unless agreed otherwise — at least 45 days, together with
sufficient information on the results it will disseminate.
Accordingly to the CA 8.4.2:
Prior notice of any planned publication, including complete draft of the publication,
shall be submitted to the Dissemination Taskforce at least 30 calendar days before the
submission. Any objection to the planned publication shall be made in accordance with the
Grant Agreement in writing to the Coordinator and to the Party or Parties proposing the
dissemination within 14 calendar days after receipt of the notice. If no objection is made
within the time limit stated above, the publication shall be deemed permitted.
Within this scope the Dissemination Committee should include a representative from every
partner.
It has been raised by several partners that this timings are incompatible with the normal
processes associated with scientific publications. For that matter a fast track process
has been proposed by CEA and discussed in the last WP12 call. Given that we will all need
to agree on the process, so we can proposed it to the GA. I'm requesting your feedback
on this.
Following up on some discussion with CEA on the subject (their proposal attached) the main
ideas are:
- authors send to the dissemination committee in current draft state 30 days before
submission deadline with statement: additional IP / security sensitive material expected
to be added (Full Track) or not expect to be added (Fast Track);
- if sensitive material in the draft, dissemination committee may object within 14 days
(as currently in the CA);
- if sensitive material is expected to be added (or already in the draft), paper needs to
be in re-submitted the final version 10 days before for a complementary round by
Dissemination committee. The dissemination committee, may reject the document within 8
days (I would say, only if new material was added).
- if no sensitive material is expected to be added (Fast Track), submitted paper is sent
after submission to Dissemination committee. The dissemination committee, may reject the
document within 14 days, and the author will be required to withdraw the paper
(retract).
Please provide your comments and ideas on this by the end of next week (if you agree,
please also let me know). So we can compile a version which we all agree.
Kind regards,
Nelson
--
Nelson Escravana
Director
Communications & Cybersecurity
Member of the Board of Directors
INOV - INESC Inovação
Rua Alves Redol, nr. 9
1000-029 Lisboa
Portugal
Tel.: + 351 21 310 0476
Fax: + 351 21 310 0445
This e-mail and its attachments may contain confidential and/or privileged information. If
you are not the intended recipient you must not use, distribute or reproduce this
e-mail.
I try to read e-mail from once to four times every business day. If you need an urgent
reply to a message, please contact me by phone.
8:21 a.m.
I agree!
Best regards,
Miguel Correia
On 25 Apr 2019, at 08:40, Algimantas Venckauskas
<algimantas.venckauskas(a)ktu.lt> wrote:
Hi,
We agree with Claudia that dissemination process is very complicated, long and poses
risks that should be avoided.
We also think that dissemination process can be decentralized: each partner institution
is responsible for publishing SPARTA papers only in compliance to the publication rules
of SPARTA.
No overall dissemination procedure is needed at all.
Algimantas Venčkauskas
From: bodies.dissemination-committee
<bodies.dissemination-committee-bounces(a)server.sparta.eu> On Behalf Of Eckert,
Claudia
Sent: Thursday, April 25, 2019 10:17 AM
To: evaldas(a)l3ce.eu; Nelson Escravana <nelson.escravana(a)inov.pt>
Cc: bodies.dissemination-committee(a)internal.sparta.eu; spartacomms(a)inov.pt
Subject: Re: [SPARTA - bodies.dissemination-committee] SPARTA Dissemination procedure
(IPR) - Fast track
Dear all,
may I ask for an even more lightweight process.
Though a fast track is a considerable improvement I still think, that the whole process
is still very complicated and poses risks that should be avoided. The dissemination
process generates considerable additional efforts, lacks transparency (e.g. I do not
know who is member of the mailing list), and even worse the risk of unintentional
information leakages (new ideas in unpublished papers are send around without control) is
very high.
Can’t we manage the thing in an efficient and complete decentralized way: each partner
institution is responsible for publishing SPARTA papers only in compliance to the
publication rules of SPARTA. No overall dissemination procedure is needed at all.
Best regards
Claudia Eckert
--
Prof. Dr. Claudia Eckert
Fraunhofer-Institut für Angewandte und Integrierte Sicherheit (AISEC) Institutsleitung
Parkring 4, 85748 Garching bei München Tel. +49 89 3 22 99 86-285 Fax +49 89 3 22 99
86-299
e-mail: claudia.eckert(a)aisec.fraunhofer.de
<mailto:claudia.eckert@aisec.fraunhofer.de>
http://www.aisec.fraunhofer.de <http://www.aisec.fraunhofer.de/>
Technische Universität München
Lehrstuhl für Sicherheit in der Informatik Fakultät für Informatik Boltzmannstr. 3
Tel.: +49 (0)89 289 18578
Fax: +49 (0)89 289 18579
85748 Garching, Germany
http://www.sec.in.tum.de <http://www.sec.in.tum.de/>
My signature is certified by Deutsche Telekom Root CA 2:
http://wwwca.telesec.de/cgi-bin/caservice/Common/InstallRoot/DT-Root-CA-2.d…
<http://wwwca.telesec.de/cgi-bin/caservice/Common/InstallRoot/DT-Root-CA-2.der>
Von: bodies.dissemination-committee
<bodies.dissemination-committee-bounces(a)server.sparta.eu
<mailto:bodies.dissemination-committee-bounces@server.sparta.eu>> Im Auftrag von
evaldas(a)l3ce.eu <mailto:evaldas@l3ce.eu>
Gesendet: Mittwoch, 24. April 2019 08:51
An: Nelson Escravana <nelson.escravana(a)inov.pt
<mailto:nelson.escravana@inov.pt>>
Cc: bodies.dissemination-committee(a)internal.sparta.eu
<mailto:bodies.dissemination-committee@internal.sparta.eu>; spartacomms(a)inov.pt
<mailto:spartacomms@inov.pt>
Betreff: Re: [SPARTA - bodies.dissemination-committee] SPARTA Dissemination procedure
(IPR) - Fast track
Dear Nelson,
We (L3CE) believe, that Fast Track procedure is of high demand. We are working in
highly complex project involving lots of inter-dependencies and to expect to have a
reasonable draft 1.5 month in advance will be very high pressure in most of the cases.
Best regards,
--
Evaldas Bruze/L3CE
T-Shark Programme Manager
2019-04-23 21:39, Nelson Escravana rašė:
Dear members of the Dissemination Committee (aka Dissemination Task Force),
I'm bringing to your attention a proposal to initiate an amendment to the consortium
agreement (CA).
Accordingly to the Grant Agreement 29.1:
A beneficiary that intends to disseminate its results must give advance notice to the
other beneficiaries of — unless agreed otherwise — at least 45 days, together with
sufficient information on the results it will disseminate.
Accordingly to the CA 8.4.2:
Prior notice of any planned publication, including complete draft of the publication,
shall be submitted to the Dissemination Taskforce at least 30 calendar days before the
submission. Any objection to the planned publication shall be made in accordance with the
Grant Agreement in writing to the Coordinator and to the Party or Parties proposing the
dissemination within 14 calendar days after receipt of the notice. If no objection is made
within the time limit stated above, the publication shall be deemed permitted.
Within this scope the Dissemination Committee should include a representative from every
partner.
It has been raised by several partners that this timings are incompatible with the normal
processes associated with scientific publications. For that matter a fast track process
has been proposed by CEA and discussed in the last WP12 call. Given that we will all need
to agree on the process, so we can proposed it to the GA. I'm requesting your feedback
on this.
Following up on some discussion with CEA on the subject (their proposal attached) the
main ideas are:
- authors send to the dissemination committee in current draft state 30 days before
submission deadline with statement: additional IP / security sensitive material expected
to be added (Full Track) or not expect to be added (Fast Track);
- if sensitive material in the draft, dissemination committee may object within 14 days
(as currently in the CA);
- if sensitive material is expected to be added (or already in the draft), paper needs to
be in re-submitted the final version 10 days before for a complementary round by
Dissemination committee. The dissemination committee, may reject the document within 8
days (I would say, only if new material was added).
- if no sensitive material is expected to be added (Fast Track), submitted paper is sent
after submission to Dissemination committee. The dissemination committee, may reject the
document within 14 days, and the author will be required to withdraw the paper (retract).
Please provide your comments and ideas on this by the end of next week (if you agree,
please also let me know). So we can compile a version which we all agree.
Kind regards,
Nelson
--
Nelson Escravana
Director
Communications & Cybersecurity
Member of the Board of Directors
INOV - INESC Inovação
Rua Alves Redol, nr. 9
1000-029 Lisboa
Portugal
Tel.: + 351 21 310 0476
Fax: + 351 21 310 0445
This e-mail and its attachments may contain confidential and/or privileged information.
If you are not the intended recipient you must not use, distribute or reproduce this
e-mail.
I try to read e-mail from once to four times every business day. If you need an urgent
reply to a message, please contact me by phone.
--
bodies.dissemination-committee mailing list
bodies.dissemination-committee(a)server.sparta.eu
http://server.sparta.eu/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/bodies.dissemination-commi…
9:22 a.m.
Dear All,
We already have good rules for dissemination in CA (signed by all partners).
I also do not think more than CA is necessary.
In fact, partners should be aware of CA and should not send papers without
following this procedure:
"Prior notice of any planned publication, including complete draft of the
publication, shall be submitted to the Dissemination Taskforce at least 30
calendar days before the submission. Any objection to the planned
publication shall be made in accordance with the Grant Agreement in
writing to the Coordinator and to the Party or Parties proposing the
dissemination within 14 calendar days after receipt of the notice. If no
objection is made within the time limit stated above, the publication
shall be deemed permitted."
Kindest Regards,
prof. Michal Choras
I agree!
Best regards,
Miguel Correia
On 25 Apr 2019, at 08:40, Algimantas Venckauskas
<algimantas.venckauskas(a)ktu.lt> wrote:
Hi,
We agree with Claudia that dissemination process is very complicated,
long and poses risks that should be avoided.
We also think that dissemination process can be decentralized: each
partner institution is responsible for publishing SPARTA papers only in
compliance to the publication rules of SPARTA.
No overall dissemination procedure is needed at all.
Algimantas Venčkauskas
From: bodies.dissemination-committee
<bodies.dissemination-committee-bounces(a)server.sparta.eu> On Behalf Of
Eckert, Claudia
Sent: Thursday, April 25, 2019 10:17 AM
To: evaldas(a)l3ce.eu; Nelson Escravana <nelson.escravana(a)inov.pt>
Cc: bodies.dissemination-committee(a)internal.sparta.eu;
spartacomms(a)inov.pt
Subject: Re: [SPARTA - bodies.dissemination-committee] SPARTA
Dissemination procedure (IPR) - Fast track
Dear all,
may I ask for an even more lightweight process.
Though a fast track is a considerable improvement I still think, that
the whole process is still very complicated and poses risks that should
be avoided. The dissemination process generates considerable additional
efforts, lacks transparency (e.g. I do not know who is member of the
mailing list), and even worse the risk of unintentional information
leakages (new ideas in unpublished papers are send around without
control) is very high.
Can?t we manage the thing in an efficient and complete decentralized
way: each partner institution is responsible for publishing SPARTA
papers only in compliance to the publication rules of SPARTA. No
overall dissemination procedure is needed at all.
Best regards
Claudia Eckert
--
Prof. Dr. Claudia Eckert
Fraunhofer-Institut für Angewandte und Integrierte Sicherheit (AISEC)
Institutsleitung Parkring 4, 85748 Garching bei München Tel. +49 89 3 22
99 86-285 Fax +49 89 3 22 99 86-299
e-mail: claudia.eckert(a)aisec.fraunhofer.de
<mailto:claudia.eckert@aisec.fraunhofer.de>
http://www.aisec.fraunhofer.de <http://www.aisec.fraunhofer.de/>
Technische Universität München
Lehrstuhl für Sicherheit in der Informatik Fakultät für Informatik
Boltzmannstr. 3
Tel.: +49 (0)89 289 18578
Fax: +49 (0)89 289 18579
85748 Garching, Germany
http://www.sec.in.tum.de <http://www.sec.in.tum.de/>
My signature is certified by Deutsche Telekom Root CA 2:
http://wwwca.telesec.de/cgi-bin/caservice/Common/InstallRoot/DT-Root-CA-2.d…
<http://wwwca.telesec.de/cgi-bin/caservice/Common/InstallRoot/DT-Root-CA-2.der>
Von: bodies.dissemination-committee
<bodies.dissemination-committee-bounces(a)server.sparta.eu
<mailto:bodies.dissemination-committee-bounces@server.sparta.eu>> Im
Auftrag von evaldas(a)l3ce.eu <mailto:evaldas@l3ce.eu>
Gesendet: Mittwoch, 24. April 2019 08:51
An: Nelson Escravana <nelson.escravana(a)inov.pt
<mailto:nelson.escravana@inov.pt>>
Cc: bodies.dissemination-committee(a)internal.sparta.eu
<mailto:bodies.dissemination-committee@internal.sparta.eu>;
spartacomms(a)inov.pt <mailto:spartacomms@inov.pt>
Betreff: Re: [SPARTA - bodies.dissemination-committee] SPARTA
Dissemination procedure (IPR) - Fast track
Dear Nelson,
We (L3CE) believe, that Fast Track procedure is of high demand. We are
working in highly complex project involving lots of inter-dependencies
and to expect to have a reasonable draft 1.5 month in advance will be
very high pressure in most of the cases.
Best regards,
--
Evaldas Bruze/L3CE
T-Shark Programme Manager
2019-04-23 21:39, Nelson Escravana raš?:
Dear members of the Dissemination Committee (aka Dissemination Task
Force),
I'm bringing to your attention a proposal to initiate an amendment to
the consortium agreement (CA).
Accordingly to the Grant Agreement 29.1:
A beneficiary that intends to disseminate its results must give advance
notice to the other beneficiaries of ? unless agreed otherwise ? at
least 45 days, together with sufficient information on the results it
will disseminate.
Accordingly to the CA 8.4.2:
Prior notice of any planned publication, including complete draft of the
publication, shall be submitted to the Dissemination Taskforce at least
30 calendar days before the submission. Any objection to the planned
publication shall be made in accordance with the Grant Agreement in
writing to the Coordinator and to the Party or Parties proposing the
dissemination within 14 calendar days after receipt of the notice. If no
objection is made within the time limit stated above, the publication
shall be deemed permitted.
Within this scope the Dissemination Committee should include a
representative from every partner.
It has been raised by several partners that this timings are
incompatible with the normal processes associated with scientific
publications. For that matter a fast track process has been proposed by
CEA and discussed in the last WP12 call. Given that we will all need to
agree on the process, so we can proposed it to the GA. I'm requesting
your feedback on this.
Following up on some discussion with CEA on the subject (their proposal
attached) the main ideas are:
- authors send to the dissemination committee in current draft state 30
days before submission deadline with statement: additional IP / security
sensitive material expected to be added (Full Track) or not expect to be
added (Fast Track);
- if sensitive material in the draft, dissemination committee may object
within 14 days (as currently in the CA);
- if sensitive material is expected to be added (or already in the
draft), paper needs to be in re-submitted the final version 10 days
before for a complementary round by Dissemination committee. The
dissemination committee, may reject the document within 8 days (I would
say, only if new material was added).
- if no sensitive material is expected to be added (Fast Track),
submitted paper is sent after submission to Dissemination committee. The
dissemination committee, may reject the document within 14 days, and the
author will be required to withdraw the paper (retract).
Please provide your comments and ideas on this by the end of next week
(if you agree, please also let me know). So we can compile a version
which we all agree.
Kind regards,
Nelson
--
Nelson Escravana
Director
Communications & Cybersecurity
Member of the Board of Directors
INOV - INESC Inovaç?o
Rua Alves Redol, nr. 9
1000-029 Lisboa
Portugal
Tel.: + 351 21 310 0476
Fax: + 351 21 310 0445
This e-mail and its attachments may contain confidential and/or
privileged information. If you are not the intended recipient you must
not use, distribute or reproduce this e-mail.
I try to read e-mail from once to four times every business day. If you
need an urgent reply to a message, please contact me by phone.
--
bodies.dissemination-committee mailing list
bodies.dissemination-committee(a)server.sparta.eu
http://server.sparta.eu/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/bodies.dissemination-commi…
--
bodies.dissemination-committee mailing list
bodies.dissemination-committee(a)server.sparta.eu
http://server.sparta.eu/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/bodies.dissemination-commi…
4:20 p.m.
Dear Michal,
There might be a misunderstanding. I do not want to have an added process, I want to
implement a more realistic process.
The CA you cited is the problem not the solution. Researcher are normally not able to
send out a new research paper 30 days before paper deadline, we all know that papers are
finished very close to the deadline. In addition, as I said before, no one will send out
unpublished ideas without being sure that information is not leaked.
Hence, I ask for an implementation, that does not require the huge overhead of the process
you cited. May be we can implement a delegation of responsibilities of the task force to
the local PIs or something like that.
Best regards
Claudia
--
Prof. Dr. Claudia Eckert
Fraunhofer-Institut für Angewandte und Integrierte Sicherheit (AISEC) Institutsleitung
Parkring 4, 85748 Garching bei München Tel. +49 89 3 22 99 86-285 Fax +49 89 3 22 99
86-299
e-mail: claudia.eckert(a)aisec.fraunhofer.de
http://www.aisec.fraunhofer.de
Technische Universität München
Lehrstuhl für Sicherheit in der Informatik Fakultät für Informatik Boltzmannstr. 3
Tel.: +49 (0)89 289 18578
Fax: +49 (0)89 289 18579
85748 Garching, Germany
http://www.sec.in.tum.de
My signature is certified by Deutsche Telekom Root CA 2:
http://wwwca.telesec.de/cgi-bin/caservice/Common/InstallRoot/DT-Root-CA-2.d…
-----Ursprüngliche Nachricht-----
Von: mchoras(a)itti.com.pl <mchoras(a)itti.com.pl>
Gesendet: Donnerstag, 25. April 2019 11:23
An: Miguel Correia <miguel.p.correia(a)tecnico.ulisboa.pt>
Cc: Algimantas Venckauskas <algimantas.venckauskas(a)ktu.lt>lt>; Eckert, Claudia
<Claudia.Eckert(a)aisec.fraunhofer.de>de>;
bodies.dissemination-committee(a)internal.sparta.eu; spartacomms(a)inov.pt
Betreff: Re: [SPARTA - bodies.dissemination-committee] SPARTA Dissemination procedure
(IPR) - Fast track
Dear All,
We already have good rules for dissemination in CA (signed by all partners).
I also do not think more than CA is necessary.
In fact, partners should be aware of CA and should not send papers without following this
procedure:
"Prior notice of any planned publication, including complete draft of the
publication, shall be submitted to the Dissemination Taskforce at least 30 calendar days
before the submission. Any objection to the planned publication shall be made in
accordance with the Grant Agreement in writing to the Coordinator and to the Party or
Parties proposing the dissemination within 14 calendar days after receipt of the notice.
If no objection is made within the time limit stated above, the publication shall be
deemed permitted."
Kindest Regards,
prof. Michal Choras
I agree!
Best regards,
Miguel Correia
On 25 Apr 2019, at 08:40, Algimantas Venckauskas
<algimantas.venckauskas(a)ktu.lt> wrote:
Hi,
We agree with Claudia that dissemination process is very
complicated, long and poses risks that should be avoided.
We also think that dissemination process can be decentralized: each
partner institution is responsible for publishing SPARTA papers only
in compliance to the publication rules of SPARTA.
No overall dissemination procedure is needed at all.
Algimantas Venčkauskas
From: bodies.dissemination-committee
<bodies.dissemination-committee-bounces(a)server.sparta.eu> On Behalf
Of Eckert, Claudia
Sent: Thursday, April 25, 2019 10:17 AM
To: evaldas(a)l3ce.eu; Nelson Escravana <nelson.escravana(a)inov.pt>
Cc: bodies.dissemination-committee(a)internal.sparta.eu;
spartacomms(a)inov.pt
Subject: Re: [SPARTA - bodies.dissemination-committee] SPARTA
Dissemination procedure (IPR) - Fast track
Dear all,
may I ask for an even more lightweight process.
Though a fast track is a considerable improvement I still think, that
the whole process is still very complicated and poses risks that
should be avoided. The dissemination process generates considerable
additional efforts, lacks transparency (e.g. I do not know who is
member of the mailing list), and even worse the risk of
unintentional information leakages (new ideas in unpublished papers
are send around without
control) is very high.
Can?t we manage the thing in an efficient and complete decentralized
way: each partner institution is responsible for publishing SPARTA
papers only in compliance to the publication rules of SPARTA. No
overall dissemination procedure is needed at all.
Best regards
Claudia Eckert
--
Prof. Dr. Claudia Eckert
Fraunhofer-Institut für Angewandte und Integrierte Sicherheit (AISEC)
Institutsleitung Parkring 4, 85748 Garching bei München Tel. +49 89 3
22
99 86-285 Fax +49 89 3 22 99 86-299
e-mail: claudia.eckert(a)aisec.fraunhofer.de
<mailto:claudia.eckert@aisec.fraunhofer.de>
http://www.aisec.fraunhofer.de <http://www.aisec.fraunhofer.de/>
Technische Universität München
Lehrstuhl für Sicherheit in der Informatik Fakultät für Informatik
Boltzmannstr. 3
Tel.: +49 (0)89 289 18578
Fax: +49 (0)89 289 18579
85748 Garching, Germany
http://www.sec.in.tum.de <http://www.sec.in.tum.de/>
My signature is certified by Deutsche Telekom Root CA 2:
http://wwwca.telesec.de/cgi-bin/caservice/Common/InstallRoot/DT-Root-
CA-2.der
<http://wwwca.telesec.de/cgi-bin/caservice/Common/InstallRoot/DT-Root
-CA-2.der>
Von: bodies.dissemination-committee
<bodies.dissemination-committee-bounces(a)server.sparta.eu
<mailto:bodies.dissemination-committee-bounces@server.sparta.eu>> Im
Auftrag von evaldas(a)l3ce.eu <mailto:evaldas@l3ce.eu>
Gesendet: Mittwoch, 24. April 2019 08:51
An: Nelson Escravana <nelson.escravana(a)inov.pt
<mailto:nelson.escravana@inov.pt>>
Cc: bodies.dissemination-committee(a)internal.sparta.eu
<mailto:bodies.dissemination-committee@internal.sparta.eu>;
spartacomms(a)inov.pt <mailto:spartacomms@inov.pt>
Betreff: Re: [SPARTA - bodies.dissemination-committee] SPARTA
Dissemination procedure (IPR) - Fast track
Dear Nelson,
We (L3CE) believe, that Fast Track procedure is of high demand. We
are working in highly complex project involving lots of
inter-dependencies and to expect to have a reasonable draft 1.5 month
in advance will be very high pressure in most of the cases.
Best regards,
--
Evaldas Bruze/L3CE
T-Shark Programme Manager
2019-04-23 21:39, Nelson Escravana raš?:
Dear members of the Dissemination Committee (aka Dissemination Task
Force),
I'm bringing to your attention a proposal to initiate an amendment to
the consortium agreement (CA).
Accordingly to the Grant Agreement 29.1:
A beneficiary that intends to disseminate its results must give
advance notice to the other beneficiaries of ? unless agreed
otherwise ? at least 45 days, together with sufficient information on
the results it will disseminate.
Accordingly to the CA 8.4.2:
Prior notice of any planned publication, including complete draft of
the publication, shall be submitted to the Dissemination Taskforce at
least
30 calendar days before the submission. Any objection to the planned
publication shall be made in accordance with the Grant Agreement in
writing to the Coordinator and to the Party or Parties proposing the
dissemination within 14 calendar days after receipt of the notice. If
no objection is made within the time limit stated above, the
publication shall be deemed permitted.
Within this scope the Dissemination Committee should include a
representative from every partner.
It has been raised by several partners that this timings are
incompatible with the normal processes associated with scientific
publications. For that matter a fast track process has been proposed
by CEA and discussed in the last WP12 call. Given that we will all
need to agree on the process, so we can proposed it to the GA. I'm
requesting your feedback on this.
Following up on some discussion with CEA on the subject (their
proposal
attached) the main ideas are:
- authors send to the dissemination committee in current draft state
30 days before submission deadline with statement: additional IP /
security sensitive material expected to be added (Full Track) or not
expect to be added (Fast Track);
- if sensitive material in the draft, dissemination committee may
object within 14 days (as currently in the CA);
- if sensitive material is expected to be added (or already in the
draft), paper needs to be in re-submitted the final version 10 days
before for a complementary round by Dissemination committee. The
dissemination committee, may reject the document within 8 days (I
would say, only if new material was added).
- if no sensitive material is expected to be added (Fast Track),
submitted paper is sent after submission to Dissemination committee.
The dissemination committee, may reject the document within 14 days,
and the author will be required to withdraw the paper (retract).
Please provide your comments and ideas on this by the end of next
week (if you agree, please also let me know). So we can compile a
version which we all agree.
Kind regards,
Nelson
--
Nelson Escravana
Director
Communications & Cybersecurity
Member of the Board of Directors
INOV - INESC Inovaç?o
Rua Alves Redol, nr. 9
1000-029 Lisboa
Portugal
Tel.: + 351 21 310 0476
Fax: + 351 21 310 0445
This e-mail and its attachments may contain confidential and/or
privileged information. If you are not the intended recipient you
must not use, distribute or reproduce this e-mail.
I try to read e-mail from once to four times every business day. If
you need an urgent reply to a message, please contact me by phone.
--
bodies.dissemination-committee mailing list
bodies.dissemination-committee(a)server.sparta.eu
http://server.sparta.eu/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/bodies.dissemination
-committee
--
bodies.dissemination-committee mailing list
bodies.dissemination-committee(a)server.sparta.eu
http://server.sparta.eu/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/bodies.dissemination-
committee
7:34 p.m.
Dear Claudia,
How can CA be a problem, if it is now signed by 44 partners including FhG..?
In fact original DESCA model for CA has 45 days, but we asked to shorten
this period and the coordinator and partners kindly agreed.
Such solution (as in CA) works well in all the projects we are now
involved. Of course, it might require from some researchers to adjust to
such mode/culture.
Indeed, one of the under-estimated threat/risk to EU projects is when you
allow researchers to publish without any control (most of them do not have
any clearances and do not understand the notion of sensitive information
and possible risks in projects).
And if they do not submit to venue X...there's a venue/conference Y next
month or Z in 2 months...and the good thing is that Earth still moves
around Sun if the paper is not submitted to X :-).
The procedures from CA allow for:
- tracking dissemination activities in the project (useful for reporting,
KPI etc.)
- avoiding any problems with co-authorship
- avoiding problems with sensitive information, info from end-users etc.
- building nice cooperation culture in the project and joint activities
In fact, in most of our projects partners send prior notice and the
advanced draft to everyone (and also to security board in security/cyber
etc. projects) and the silent acceptance procedure is implemented.
Kindest Regards,
prof. Michal Choras, PhD Eng., D.Sc (habil.)
Dear Michal,
There might be a misunderstanding. I do not want to have an added process,
I want to implement a more realistic process.
The CA you cited is the problem not the solution. Researcher are normally
not able to send out a new research paper 30 days before paper
deadline, we all know that papers are finished very close to the deadline.
In addition, as I said before, no one will send out unpublished ideas
without being sure that information is not leaked.
Hence, I ask for an implementation, that does not require the huge
overhead of the process you cited. May be we can implement a delegation of
responsibilities of the task force to the local PIs or something like
that.
Best regards
Claudia
--
Prof. Dr. Claudia Eckert
Fraunhofer-Institut für Angewandte und Integrierte Sicherheit (AISEC)
Institutsleitung Parkring 4, 85748 Garching bei München Tel. +49 89 3 22
99 86-285 Fax +49 89 3 22 99 86-299
e-mail: claudia.eckert(a)aisec.fraunhofer.de
http://www.aisec.fraunhofer.de
Technische Universität München
Lehrstuhl für Sicherheit in der Informatik Fakultät für Informatik
Boltzmannstr. 3
Tel.: +49 (0)89 289 18578
Fax: +49 (0)89 289 18579
85748 Garching, Germany
http://www.sec.in.tum.de
My signature is certified by Deutsche Telekom Root CA 2:
http://wwwca.telesec.de/cgi-bin/caservice/Common/InstallRoot/DT-Root-CA-2.d…
-----Ursprüngliche Nachricht-----
Von: mchoras(a)itti.com.pl <mchoras(a)itti.com.pl>
Gesendet: Donnerstag, 25. April 2019 11:23
An: Miguel Correia <miguel.p.correia(a)tecnico.ulisboa.pt>
Cc: Algimantas Venckauskas <algimantas.venckauskas(a)ktu.lt>lt>; Eckert,
Claudia <Claudia.Eckert(a)aisec.fraunhofer.de>de>;
bodies.dissemination-committee(a)internal.sparta.eu; spartacomms(a)inov.pt
Betreff: Re: [SPARTA - bodies.dissemination-committee] SPARTA
Dissemination procedure (IPR) - Fast track
Dear All,
We already have good rules for dissemination in CA (signed by all
partners).
I also do not think more than CA is necessary.
In fact, partners should be aware of CA and should not send papers without
following this procedure:
"Prior notice of any planned publication, including complete draft of the
publication, shall be submitted to the Dissemination Taskforce at least 30
calendar days before the submission. Any objection to the planned
publication shall be made in accordance with the Grant Agreement in
writing to the Coordinator and to the Party or Parties proposing the
dissemination within 14 calendar days after receipt of the notice. If no
objection is made within the time limit stated above, the publication
shall be deemed permitted."
Kindest Regards,
prof. Michal Choras
I agree!
Best regards,
Miguel Correia
On 25 Apr 2019, at 08:40, Algimantas Venckauskas
<algimantas.venckauskas(a)ktu.lt> wrote:
Hi,
We agree with Claudia that dissemination process is very
complicated, long and poses risks that should be avoided.
We also think that dissemination process can be decentralized: each
partner institution is responsible for publishing SPARTA papers only
in compliance to the publication rules of SPARTA.
No overall dissemination procedure is needed at all.
Algimantas Venčkauskas
From: bodies.dissemination-committee
<bodies.dissemination-committee-bounces(a)server.sparta.eu> On Behalf
Of Eckert, Claudia
Sent: Thursday, April 25, 2019 10:17 AM
To: evaldas(a)l3ce.eu; Nelson Escravana <nelson.escravana(a)inov.pt>
Cc: bodies.dissemination-committee(a)internal.sparta.eu;
spartacomms(a)inov.pt
Subject: Re: [SPARTA - bodies.dissemination-committee] SPARTA
Dissemination procedure (IPR) - Fast track
Dear all,
may I ask for an even more lightweight process.
Though a fast track is a considerable improvement I still think, that
the whole process is still very complicated and poses risks that
should be avoided. The dissemination process generates considerable
additional efforts, lacks transparency (e.g. I do not know who is
member of the mailing list), and even worse the risk of
unintentional information leakages (new ideas in unpublished papers
are send around without
control) is very high.
Can?t we manage the thing in an efficient and complete decentralized
way: each partner institution is responsible for publishing SPARTA
papers only in compliance to the publication rules of SPARTA. No
overall dissemination procedure is needed at all.
Best regards
Claudia Eckert
--
Prof. Dr. Claudia Eckert
Fraunhofer-Institut für Angewandte und Integrierte Sicherheit (AISEC)
Institutsleitung Parkring 4, 85748 Garching bei München Tel. +49 89 3
22
99 86-285 Fax +49 89 3 22 99 86-299
e-mail: claudia.eckert(a)aisec.fraunhofer.de
<mailto:claudia.eckert@aisec.fraunhofer.de>
http://www.aisec.fraunhofer.de <http://www.aisec.fraunhofer.de/>
Technische Universität München
Lehrstuhl für Sicherheit in der Informatik Fakultät für Informatik
Boltzmannstr. 3
Tel.: +49 (0)89 289 18578
Fax: +49 (0)89 289 18579
85748 Garching, Germany
http://www.sec.in.tum.de <http://www.sec.in.tum.de/>
My signature is certified by Deutsche Telekom Root CA 2:
http://wwwca.telesec.de/cgi-bin/caservice/Common/InstallRoot/DT-Root-
CA-2.der
<http://wwwca.telesec.de/cgi-bin/caservice/Common/InstallRoot/DT-Root
-CA-2.der>
Von: bodies.dissemination-committee
<bodies.dissemination-committee-bounces(a)server.sparta.eu
<mailto:bodies.dissemination-committee-bounces@server.sparta.eu>> Im
Auftrag von evaldas(a)l3ce.eu <mailto:evaldas@l3ce.eu>
Gesendet: Mittwoch, 24. April 2019 08:51
An: Nelson Escravana <nelson.escravana(a)inov.pt
<mailto:nelson.escravana@inov.pt>>
Cc: bodies.dissemination-committee(a)internal.sparta.eu
<mailto:bodies.dissemination-committee@internal.sparta.eu>;
spartacomms(a)inov.pt <mailto:spartacomms@inov.pt>
Betreff: Re: [SPARTA - bodies.dissemination-committee] SPARTA
Dissemination procedure (IPR) - Fast track
Dear Nelson,
We (L3CE) believe, that Fast Track procedure is of high demand. We
are working in highly complex project involving lots of
inter-dependencies and to expect to have a reasonable draft 1.5 month
in advance will be very high pressure in most of the cases.
Best regards,
--
Evaldas Bruze/L3CE
T-Shark Programme Manager
2019-04-23 21:39, Nelson Escravana raš?:
Dear members of the Dissemination Committee (aka Dissemination Task
Force),
I'm bringing to your attention a proposal to initiate an amendment to
the consortium agreement (CA).
Accordingly to the Grant Agreement 29.1:
A beneficiary that intends to disseminate its results must give
advance notice to the other beneficiaries of ? unless agreed
otherwise ? at least 45 days, together with sufficient information on
the results it will disseminate.
Accordingly to the CA 8.4.2:
Prior notice of any planned publication, including complete draft of
the publication, shall be submitted to the Dissemination Taskforce at
least
30 calendar days before the submission. Any objection to the planned
publication shall be made in accordance with the Grant Agreement in
writing to the Coordinator and to the Party or Parties proposing the
dissemination within 14 calendar days after receipt of the notice. If
no objection is made within the time limit stated above, the
publication shall be deemed permitted.
Within this scope the Dissemination Committee should include a
representative from every partner.
It has been raised by several partners that this timings are
incompatible with the normal processes associated with scientific
publications. For that matter a fast track process has been proposed
by CEA and discussed in the last WP12 call. Given that we will all
need to agree on the process, so we can proposed it to the GA. I'm
requesting your feedback on this.
Following up on some discussion with CEA on the subject (their
proposal
attached) the main ideas are:
- authors send to the dissemination committee in current draft state
30 days before submission deadline with statement: additional IP /
security sensitive material expected to be added (Full Track) or not
expect to be added (Fast Track);
- if sensitive material in the draft, dissemination committee may
object within 14 days (as currently in the CA);
- if sensitive material is expected to be added (or already in the
draft), paper needs to be in re-submitted the final version 10 days
before for a complementary round by Dissemination committee. The
dissemination committee, may reject the document within 8 days (I
would say, only if new material was added).
- if no sensitive material is expected to be added (Fast Track),
submitted paper is sent after submission to Dissemination committee.
The dissemination committee, may reject the document within 14 days,
and the author will be required to withdraw the paper (retract).
Please provide your comments and ideas on this by the end of next
week (if you agree, please also let me know). So we can compile a
version which we all agree.
Kind regards,
Nelson
--
Nelson Escravana
Director
Communications & Cybersecurity
Member of the Board of Directors
INOV - INESC Inovaç?o
Rua Alves Redol, nr. 9
1000-029 Lisboa
Portugal
Tel.: + 351 21 310 0476
Fax: + 351 21 310 0445
This e-mail and its attachments may contain confidential and/or
privileged information. If you are not the intended recipient you
must not use, distribute or reproduce this e-mail.
I try to read e-mail from once to four times every business day. If
you need an urgent reply to a message, please contact me by phone.
--
bodies.dissemination-committee mailing list
bodies.dissemination-committee(a)server.sparta.eu
http://server.sparta.eu/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/bodies.dissemination
-committee
--
bodies.dissemination-committee mailing list
bodies.dissemination-committee(a)server.sparta.eu
http://server.sparta.eu/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/bodies.dissemination-
committee
26 Apr
26 Apr
7:10 a.m.
I fully agree with Claudia,
Jean-LUc (IMT)
De: "Claudia Eckert" <Claudia.Eckert(a)aisec.fraunhofer.de>
À: mchoras(a)itti.com.pl, "Miguel Correia"
<miguel.p.correia(a)tecnico.ulisboa.pt>
Cc: "bodies dissemination-committee"
<bodies.dissemination-committee(a)internal.sparta.eu>eu>, spartacomms(a)inov.pt
Envoyé: Jeudi 25 Avril 2019 18:20:00
Objet: Re: [SPARTA - bodies.dissemination-committee] SPARTA Dissemination procedure (IPR)
- Fast track
Dear Michal,
There might be a misunderstanding. I do not want to have an added process, I want to
implement a more realistic process.
The CA you cited is the problem not the solution. Researcher are normally not able to send
out a new research paper 30 days before paper deadline, we all know that papers are
finished very close to the deadline. In addition, as I said before, no one will send out
unpublished ideas without being sure that information is not leaked.
Hence, I ask for an implementation, that does not require the huge overhead of the process
you cited. May be we can implement a delegation of responsibilities of the task force to
the local PIs or something like that.
Best regards
Claudia
--
Prof. Dr. Claudia Eckert
Fraunhofer-Institut für Angewandte und Integrierte Sicherheit (AISEC) Institutsleitung
Parkring 4, 85748 Garching bei München Tel. +49 89 3 22 99 86-285 Fax +49 89 3 22 99
86-299
e-mail: claudia.eckert(a)aisec.fraunhofer.de
http://www.aisec.fraunhofer.de
Technische Universität München
Lehrstuhl für Sicherheit in der Informatik Fakultät für Informatik Boltzmannstr. 3
Tel.: +49 (0)89 289 18578
Fax: +49 (0)89 289 18579
85748 Garching, Germany
http://www.sec.in.tum.de
My signature is certified by Deutsche Telekom Root CA 2:
http://wwwca.telesec.de/cgi-bin/caservice/Common/InstallRoot/DT-Root-CA-2.d…
-----Ursprüngliche Nachricht-----
Von: mchoras(a)itti.com.pl <mchoras(a)itti.com.pl>
Gesendet: Donnerstag, 25. April 2019 11:23
An: Miguel Correia <miguel.p.correia(a)tecnico.ulisboa.pt>
Cc: Algimantas Venckauskas <algimantas.venckauskas(a)ktu.lt>lt>; Eckert, Claudia
<Claudia.Eckert(a)aisec.fraunhofer.de>de>;
bodies.dissemination-committee(a)internal.sparta.eu; spartacomms(a)inov.pt
Betreff: Re: [SPARTA - bodies.dissemination-committee] SPARTA Dissemination procedure
(IPR) - Fast track
Dear All,
We already have good rules for dissemination in CA (signed by all partners).
I also do not think more than CA is necessary.
In fact, partners should be aware of CA and should not send papers without following this
procedure:
"Prior notice of any planned publication, including complete draft of the
publication, shall be submitted to the Dissemination Taskforce at least 30 calendar days
before the submission. Any objection to the planned publication shall be made in
accordance with the Grant Agreement in writing to the Coordinator and to the Party or
Parties proposing the dissemination within 14 calendar days after receipt of the notice.
If no objection is made within the time limit stated above, the publication shall be
deemed permitted."
Kindest Regards,
prof. Michal Choras
I agree!
Best regards,
Miguel Correia
--
bodies.dissemination-committee mailing list
bodies.dissemination-committee(a)server.sparta.eu
http://server.sparta.eu/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/bodies.dissemination-commi…
On 25 Apr 2019, at 08:40, Algimantas Venckauskas
<algimantas.venckauskas(a)ktu.lt> wrote:
Hi,
We agree with Claudia that dissemination process is very
complicated, long and poses risks that should be avoided.
We also think that dissemination process can be decentralized: each
partner institution is responsible for publishing SPARTA papers only
in compliance to the publication rules of SPARTA.
No overall dissemination procedure is needed at all.
Algimantas Venčkauskas
From: bodies.dissemination-committee
<bodies.dissemination-committee-bounces(a)server.sparta.eu> On Behalf
Of Eckert, Claudia
Sent: Thursday, April 25, 2019 10:17 AM
To: evaldas(a)l3ce.eu; Nelson Escravana <nelson.escravana(a)inov.pt>
Cc: bodies.dissemination-committee(a)internal.sparta.eu;
spartacomms(a)inov.pt
Subject: Re: [SPARTA - bodies.dissemination-committee] SPARTA
Dissemination procedure (IPR) - Fast track
Dear all,
may I ask for an even more lightweight process.
Though a fast track is a considerable improvement I still think, that
the whole process is still very complicated and poses risks that
should be avoided. The dissemination process generates considerable
additional efforts, lacks transparency (e.g. I do not know who is
member of the mailing list), and even worse the risk of
unintentional information leakages (new ideas in unpublished papers
are send around without
control) is very high.
Can?t we manage the thing in an efficient and complete decentralized
way: each partner institution is responsible for publishing SPARTA
papers only in compliance to the publication rules of SPARTA. No
overall dissemination procedure is needed at all.
Best regards
Claudia Eckert
--
Prof. Dr. Claudia Eckert
Fraunhofer-Institut für Angewandte und Integrierte Sicherheit (AISEC)
Institutsleitung Parkring 4, 85748 Garching bei München Tel. +49 89 3
22
99 86-285 Fax +49 89 3 22 99 86-299
e-mail: claudia.eckert(a)aisec.fraunhofer.de
<mailto:claudia.eckert@aisec.fraunhofer.de>
http://www.aisec.fraunhofer.de <http://www.aisec.fraunhofer.de/>
Technische Universität München
Lehrstuhl für Sicherheit in der Informatik Fakultät für Informatik
Boltzmannstr. 3
Tel.: +49 (0)89 289 18578
Fax: +49 (0)89 289 18579
85748 Garching, Germany
http://www.sec.in.tum.de <http://www.sec.in.tum.de/>
My signature is certified by Deutsche Telekom Root CA 2:
http://wwwca.telesec.de/cgi-bin/caservice/Common/InstallRoot/DT-Root-
CA-2.der
<http://wwwca.telesec.de/cgi-bin/caservice/Common/InstallRoot/DT-Root
-CA-2.der>
Von: bodies.dissemination-committee
<bodies.dissemination-committee-bounces(a)server.sparta.eu
<mailto:bodies.dissemination-committee-bounces@server.sparta.eu>> Im
Auftrag von evaldas(a)l3ce.eu <mailto:evaldas@l3ce.eu>
Gesendet: Mittwoch, 24. April 2019 08:51
An: Nelson Escravana <nelson.escravana(a)inov.pt
<mailto:nelson.escravana@inov.pt>>
Cc: bodies.dissemination-committee(a)internal.sparta.eu
<mailto:bodies.dissemination-committee@internal.sparta.eu>;
spartacomms(a)inov.pt <mailto:spartacomms@inov.pt>
Betreff: Re: [SPARTA - bodies.dissemination-committee] SPARTA
Dissemination procedure (IPR) - Fast track
Dear Nelson,
We (L3CE) believe, that Fast Track procedure is of high demand. We
are working in highly complex project involving lots of
inter-dependencies and to expect to have a reasonable draft 1.5 month
in advance will be very high pressure in most of the cases.
Best regards,
--
Evaldas Bruze/L3CE
T-Shark Programme Manager
2019-04-23 21:39, Nelson Escravana raš?:
Dear members of the Dissemination Committee (aka Dissemination Task
Force),
I'm bringing to your attention a proposal to initiate an amendment to
the consortium agreement (CA).
Accordingly to the Grant Agreement 29.1:
A beneficiary that intends to disseminate its results must give
advance notice to the other beneficiaries of ? unless agreed
otherwise ? at least 45 days, together with sufficient information on
the results it will disseminate.
Accordingly to the CA 8.4.2:
Prior notice of any planned publication, including complete draft of
the publication, shall be submitted to the Dissemination Taskforce at
least
30 calendar days before the submission. Any objection to the planned
publication shall be made in accordance with the Grant Agreement in
writing to the Coordinator and to the Party or Parties proposing the
dissemination within 14 calendar days after receipt of the notice. If
no objection is made within the time limit stated above, the
publication shall be deemed permitted.
Within this scope the Dissemination Committee should include a
representative from every partner.
It has been raised by several partners that this timings are
incompatible with the normal processes associated with scientific
publications. For that matter a fast track process has been proposed
by CEA and discussed in the last WP12 call. Given that we will all
need to agree on the process, so we can proposed it to the GA. I'm
requesting your feedback on this.
Following up on some discussion with CEA on the subject (their
proposal
attached) the main ideas are:
- authors send to the dissemination committee in current draft state
30 days before submission deadline with statement: additional IP /
security sensitive material expected to be added (Full Track) or not
expect to be added (Fast Track);
- if sensitive material in the draft, dissemination committee may
object within 14 days (as currently in the CA);
- if sensitive material is expected to be added (or already in the
draft), paper needs to be in re-submitted the final version 10 days
before for a complementary round by Dissemination committee. The
dissemination committee, may reject the document within 8 days (I
would say, only if new material was added).
- if no sensitive material is expected to be added (Fast Track),
submitted paper is sent after submission to Dissemination committee.
The dissemination committee, may reject the document within 14 days,
and the author will be required to withdraw the paper (retract).
Please provide your comments and ideas on this by the end of next
week (if you agree, please also let me know). So we can compile a
version which we all agree.
Kind regards,
Nelson
--
Nelson Escravana
Director
Communications & Cybersecurity
Member of the Board of Directors
INOV - INESC Inovaç?o
Rua Alves Redol, nr. 9
1000-029 Lisboa
Portugal
Tel.: + 351 21 310 0476
Fax: + 351 21 310 0445
This e-mail and its attachments may contain confidential and/or
privileged information. If you are not the intended recipient you
must not use, distribute or reproduce this e-mail.
I try to read e-mail from once to four times every business day. If
you need an urgent reply to a message, please contact me by phone.
--
bodies.dissemination-committee mailing list
bodies.dissemination-committee(a)server.sparta.eu
http://server.sparta.eu/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/bodies.dissemination
-committee
--
bodies.dissemination-committee mailing list
bodies.dissemination-committee(a)server.sparta.eu
http://server.sparta.eu/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/bodies.dissemination-
committee
9:21 a.m.
We also agree with Claudia,
Pilar Ruiz (Tecnalia)
De: bodies.dissemination-committee
<bodies.dissemination-committee-bounces(a)server.sparta.eu> En nombre de Jean-Luc
Danger
Enviado el: viernes, 26 de abril de 2019 9:11
Para: Claudia Eckert <Claudia.Eckert(a)aisec.fraunhofer.de>
CC: bodies dissemination-committee
<bodies.dissemination-committee(a)internal.sparta.eu>eu>; spartacomms(a)inov.pt
Asunto: Re: [SPARTA - bodies.dissemination-committee] SPARTA Dissemination procedure (IPR)
- Fast track
I fully agree with Claudia,
Jean-LUc (IMT)
________________________________
De: "Claudia Eckert"
<Claudia.Eckert@aisec.fraunhofer.de<mailto:Claudia.Eckert@aisec.fraunhofer.de>>
À: mchoras@itti.com.pl<mailto:mchoras@itti.com.pl>, "Miguel Correia"
<miguel.p.correia@tecnico.ulisboa.pt<mailto:miguel.p.correia@tecnico.ulisboa.pt>>
Cc: "bodies dissemination-committee"
<bodies.dissemination-committee@internal.sparta.eu<mailto:bodies.dissemination-committee@internal.sparta.eu>>,
spartacomms@inov.pt<mailto:spartacomms@inov.pt>
Envoyé: Jeudi 25 Avril 2019 18:20:00
Objet: Re: [SPARTA - bodies.dissemination-committee] SPARTA Dissemination procedure (IPR)
- Fast track
Dear Michal,
There might be a misunderstanding. I do not want to have an added process, I want to
implement a more realistic process.
The CA you cited is the problem not the solution. Researcher are normally not able to
send out a new research paper 30 days before paper deadline, we all know that papers are
finished very close to the deadline. In addition, as I said before, no one will send out
unpublished ideas without being sure that information is not leaked.
Hence, I ask for an implementation, that does not require the huge overhead of the process
you cited. May be we can implement a delegation of responsibilities of the task force to
the local PIs or something like that.
Best regards
Claudia
--
Prof. Dr. Claudia Eckert
Fraunhofer-Institut für Angewandte und Integrierte Sicherheit (AISEC) Institutsleitung
Parkring 4, 85748 Garching bei München Tel. +49 89 3 22 99 86-285 Fax +49 89 3 22 99
86-299
e-mail:
claudia.eckert@aisec.fraunhofer.de<mailto:claudia.eckert@aisec.fraunhofer.de>
http://www.aisec.fraunhofer.de
Technische Universität München
Lehrstuhl für Sicherheit in der Informatik Fakultät für Informatik Boltzmannstr. 3
Tel.: +49 (0)89 289 18578
Fax: +49 (0)89 289 18579
85748 Garching, Germany
http://www.sec.in.tum.de
My signature is certified by Deutsche Telekom Root CA 2:
http://wwwca.telesec.de/cgi-bin/caservice/Common/InstallRoot/DT-Root-CA-2.d…
-----Ursprüngliche Nachricht-----
Von: mchoras@itti.com.pl<mailto:mchoras@itti.com.pl>
<mchoras@itti.com.pl<mailto:mchoras@itti.com.pl>>
Gesendet: Donnerstag, 25. April 2019 11:23
An: Miguel Correia
<miguel.p.correia@tecnico.ulisboa.pt<mailto:miguel.p.correia@tecnico.ulisboa.pt>>
Cc: Algimantas Venckauskas
<algimantas.venckauskas@ktu.lt<mailto:algimantas.venckauskas@ktu.lt>>; Eckert,
Claudia
<Claudia.Eckert@aisec.fraunhofer.de<mailto:Claudia.Eckert@aisec.fraunhofer.de>>;
bodies.dissemination-committee@internal.sparta.eu<mailto:bodies.dissemination-committee@internal.sparta.eu>;
spartacomms@inov.pt<mailto:spartacomms@inov.pt>
Betreff: Re: [SPARTA - bodies.dissemination-committee] SPARTA Dissemination procedure
(IPR) - Fast track
Dear All,
We already have good rules for dissemination in CA (signed by all partners).
I also do not think more than CA is necessary.
In fact, partners should be aware of CA and should not send papers without following this
procedure:
"Prior notice of any planned publication, including complete draft of the
publication, shall be submitted to the Dissemination Taskforce at least 30 calendar days
before the submission. Any objection to the planned publication shall be made in
accordance with the Grant Agreement in writing to the Coordinator and to the Party or
Parties proposing the dissemination within 14 calendar days after receipt of the notice.
If no objection is made within the time limit stated above, the publication shall be
deemed permitted."
Kindest Regards,
prof. Michal Choras
--
bodies.dissemination-committee mailing list
bodies.dissemination-committee@server.sparta.eu<mailto:bodies.dissemination-committee@server.sparta.eu>
http://server.sparta.eu/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/bodies.dissemination-commi…
I agree!
Best regards,
Miguel Correia
> On 25 Apr 2019, at 08:40, Algimantas Venckauskas
> <algimantas.venckauskas@ktu.lt<mailto:algimantas.venckauskas@ktu.lt>>
wrote:
>
> Hi,
>
> We agree with Claudia that dissemination process is very
> complicated, long and poses risks that should be avoided.
>
> We also think that dissemination process can be decentralized: each
> partner institution is responsible for publishing SPARTA papers only
> in compliance to the publication rules of SPARTA.
> No overall dissemination procedure is needed at all.
>
> Algimantas Venčkauskas
>
>
> From: bodies.dissemination-committee
>
<bodies.dissemination-committee-bounces@server.sparta.eu<mailto:bodies.dissemination-committee-bounces@server.sparta.eu>>
On Behalf
> Of Eckert, Claudia
> Sent: Thursday, April 25, 2019 10:17 AM
> To: evaldas@l3ce.eu<mailto:evaldas@l3ce.eu>; Nelson Escravana
<nelson.escravana@inov.pt<mailto:nelson.escravana@inov.pt>>
> Cc:
bodies.dissemination-committee@internal.sparta.eu<mailto:bodies.dissemination-committee@internal.sparta.eu>;
> spartacomms@inov.pt<mailto:spartacomms@inov.pt>
> Subject: Re: [SPARTA - bodies.dissemination-committee] SPARTA
> Dissemination procedure (IPR) - Fast track
>
> Dear all,
> may I ask for an even more lightweight process.
> Though a fast track is a considerable improvement I still think, that
> the whole process is still very complicated and poses risks that
> should be avoided. The dissemination process generates considerable
> additional efforts, lacks transparency (e.g. I do not know who is
> member of the mailing list), and even worse the risk of
> unintentional information leakages (new ideas in unpublished papers
> are send around without
> control) is very high.
>
> Can?t we manage the thing in an efficient and complete decentralized
> way: each partner institution is responsible for publishing SPARTA
> papers only in compliance to the publication rules of SPARTA. No
> overall dissemination procedure is needed at all.
> Best regards
> Claudia Eckert
>
> --
>
> Prof. Dr. Claudia Eckert
> Fraunhofer-Institut für Angewandte und Integrierte Sicherheit (AISEC)
> Institutsleitung Parkring 4, 85748 Garching bei München Tel. +49 89 3
> 22
> 99 86-285 Fax +49 89 3 22 99 86-299
> e-mail:
claudia.eckert@aisec.fraunhofer.de<mailto:claudia.eckert@aisec.fraunhofer.de>
> <mailto:claudia.eckert@aisec.fraunhofer.de>
> http://www.aisec.fraunhofer.de <http://www.aisec.fraunhofer.de/>
>
> Technische Universität München
> Lehrstuhl für Sicherheit in der Informatik Fakultät für Informatik
> Boltzmannstr. 3
> Tel.: +49 (0)89 289 18578
> Fax: +49 (0)89 289 18579
> 85748 Garching, Germany
> http://www.sec.in.tum.de <http://www.sec.in.tum.de/>
>
>
> My signature is certified by Deutsche Telekom Root CA 2:
> http://wwwca.telesec.de/cgi-bin/caservice/Common/InstallRoot/DT-Root-
> CA-2.der
> <http://wwwca.telesec.de/cgi-bin/caservice/Common/InstallRoot/DT-Root
<http://wwwca.telesec.de/cgi-bin/caservice/Common/InstallRoot/DT-Root%0b>>>
-CA-2.der>
>
>
> Von: bodies.dissemination-committee
> <bodies.dissemination-committee-bounces(a)server.sparta.eu
<mailto:bodies.dissemination-committee-bounces@server.sparta.eu%0b>>>
<mailto:bodies.dissemination-committee-bounces@server.sparta.eu>> Im
> Auftrag von
evaldas@l3ce.eu<mailto:evaldas@l3ce.eu> <mailto:evaldas@l3ce.eu>
> Gesendet: Mittwoch, 24. April 2019 08:51
> An: Nelson Escravana <nelson.escravana(a)inov.pt
<mailto:nelson.escravana@inov.pt%20%0b>>>
<mailto:nelson.escravana@inov.pt>>
Cc:
bodies.dissemination-committee@internal.sparta.eu<mailto:bodies.dissemination-committee@internal.sparta.eu>
<mailto:bodies.dissemination-committee@internal.sparta.eu>;
spartacomms@inov.pt<mailto:spartacomms@inov.pt>
<mailto:spartacomms@inov.pt>
Betreff: Re: [SPARTA - bodies.dissemination-committee] SPARTA
Dissemination procedure (IPR) - Fast track
Dear Nelson,
We (L3CE) believe, that Fast Track procedure is of high demand. We
are working in highly complex project involving lots of
inter-dependencies and to expect to have a reasonable draft 1.5 month
in advance will be very high pressure in most of the cases.
Best regards,
--
Evaldas Bruze/L3CE
T-Shark Programme Manager
2019-04-23 21:39, Nelson Escravana raš?:
Dear members of the Dissemination Committee (aka Dissemination Task
Force),
I'm bringing to your attention a proposal to initiate an amendment to
the consortium agreement (CA).
Accordingly to the Grant Agreement 29.1:
A beneficiary that intends to disseminate its results must give
advance notice to the other beneficiaries of ? unless agreed
otherwise ? at least 45 days, together with sufficient information on
the results it will disseminate.
Accordingly to the CA 8.4.2:
Prior notice of any planned publication, including complete draft of
the publication, shall be submitted to the Dissemination Taskforce at
least
30 calendar days before the submission. Any objection to the planned
publication shall be made in accordance with the Grant Agreement in
writing to the Coordinator and to the Party or Parties proposing the
dissemination within 14 calendar days after receipt of the notice. If
no objection is made within the time limit stated above, the
publication shall be deemed permitted.
Within this scope the Dissemination Committee should include a
representative from every partner.
It has been raised by several partners that this timings are
incompatible with the normal processes associated with scientific
publications. For that matter a fast track process has been proposed
by CEA and discussed in the last WP12 call. Given that we will all
need to agree on the process, so we can proposed it to the GA. I'm
requesting your feedback on this.
Following up on some discussion with CEA on the subject (their
proposal
attached) the main ideas are:
- authors send to the dissemination committee in current draft state
30 days before submission deadline with statement: additional IP /
security sensitive material expected to be added (Full Track) or not
expect to be added (Fast Track);
- if sensitive material in the draft, dissemination committee may
object within 14 days (as currently in the CA);
- if sensitive material is expected to be added (or already in the
draft), paper needs to be in re-submitted the final version 10 days
before for a complementary round by Dissemination committee. The
dissemination committee, may reject the document within 8 days (I
would say, only if new material was added).
- if no sensitive material is expected to be added (Fast Track),
submitted paper is sent after submission to Dissemination committee.
The dissemination committee, may reject the document within 14 days,
and the author will be required to withdraw the paper (retract).
Please provide your comments and ideas on this by the end of next
week (if you agree, please also let me know). So we can compile a
version which we all agree.
Kind regards,
Nelson
--
Nelson Escravana
Director
Communications & Cybersecurity
Member of the Board of Directors
INOV - INESC Inovaç?o
Rua Alves Redol, nr. 9
1000-029 Lisboa
Portugal
Tel.: + 351 21 310 0476
Fax: + 351 21 310 0445
This e-mail and its attachments may contain confidential and/or
privileged information. If you are not the intended recipient you
must not use, distribute or reproduce this e-mail.
I try to read e-mail from once to four times every business day. If
you need an urgent reply to a message, please contact me by phone.
--
bodies.dissemination-committee mailing list
bodies.dissemination-committee@server.sparta.eu<mailto:bodies.dissemination-committee@server.sparta.eu>
http://server.sparta.eu/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/bodies.dissemination
-committee
--
bodies.dissemination-committee mailing list
bodies.dissemination-committee@server.sparta.eu<mailto:bodies.dissemination-committee@server.sparta.eu>
http://server.sparta.eu/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/bodies.dissemination-
committee
9:57 a.m.
Dear All
I agree with Michal. Changing the CA will be a big effort, without much change in
efficiency.
Cheers,
Pascal Steichen
--
Pascal Steichen - CEO
SECURITYMADEIN.LU
CASES - CIRCL - C3
16, blvd d’Avranches L-1160 Luxembourg
(+352) 274 00 98 601 - pascal.steichen(a)securitymadein.lu
D1DF 00E4 A9BD 1649 8A89 F62F 32C9 485E 0549 E7E1
www.securitymadein.lu
www.cases.lu
www.circl.lu
www.c-3.lu
24 Apr
24 Apr
1:19 p.m.
Dear Nelson and all,
NCSRD agrees with your proposal
Best regards
Thanasis
From: bodies.dissemination-committee
[mailto:bodies.dissemination-committee-bounces@server.sparta.eu] On Behalf Of Nelson
Escravana
Sent: Tuesday, April 23, 2019 9:39 PM
To: bodies.dissemination-committee(a)internal.sparta.eu
Cc: spartacomms(a)inov.pt
Subject: [SPARTA - bodies.dissemination-committee] SPARTA Dissemination procedure (IPR) -
Fast track
Dear members of the Dissemination Committee (aka Dissemination Task Force),
I'm bringing to your attention a proposal to initiate an amendment to the consortium
agreement (CA).
Accordingly to the Grant Agreement 29.1:
A beneficiary that intends to disseminate its results must give advance notice to the
other beneficiaries of — unless agreed otherwise — at least 45 days, together with
sufficient information on the results it will disseminate.
Accordingly to the CA 8.4.2:
Prior notice of any planned publication, including complete draft of the publication,
shall be submitted to the Dissemination Taskforce at least 30 calendar days before the
submission. Any objection to the planned publication shall be made in accordance with the
Grant Agreement in writing to the Coordinator and to the Party or Parties proposing the
dissemination within 14 calendar days after receipt of the notice. If no objection is made
within the time limit stated above, the publication shall be deemed permitted.
Within this scope the Dissemination Committee should include a representative from every
partner.
It has been raised by several partners that this timings are incompatible with the normal
processes associated with scientific publications. For that matter a fast track process
has been proposed by CEA and discussed in the last WP12 call. Given that we will all need
to agree on the process, so we can proposed it to the GA. I'm requesting your feedback
on this.
Following up on some discussion with CEA on the subject (their proposal attached) the main
ideas are:
- authors send to the dissemination committee in current draft state 30 days before
submission deadline with statement: additional IP / security sensitive material expected
to be added (Full Track) or not expect to be added (Fast Track);
- if sensitive material in the draft, dissemination committee may object within 14 days
(as currently in the CA);
- if sensitive material is expected to be added (or already in the draft), paper needs to
be in re-submitted the final version 10 days before for a complementary round by
Dissemination committee. The dissemination committee, may reject the document within 8
days (I would say, only if new material was added).
- if no sensitive material is expected to be added (Fast Track), submitted paper is sent
after submission to Dissemination committee. The dissemination committee, may reject the
document within 14 days, and the author will be required to withdraw the paper
(retract).
Please provide your comments and ideas on this by the end of next week (if you agree,
please also let me know). So we can compile a version which we all agree.
Kind regards,
Nelson
--
Nelson Escravana
Director
Communications & Cybersecurity
Member of the Board of Directors
INOV - INESC Inovação
Rua Alves Redol, nr. 9
1000-029 Lisboa
Portugal
Tel.: + 351 21 310 0476
Fax: + 351 21 310 0445
This e-mail and its attachments may contain confidential and/or privileged information. If
you are not the intended recipient you must not use, distribute or reproduce this
e-mail.
I try to read e-mail from once to four times every business day. If you need an urgent
reply to a message, please contact me by phone.
2359
days inactive
2362
days old
bodies.dissemination-committee@internal.sparta.eu
16 comments
13 participants
participants (13)
-
Algimantas Venckauskas -
Dimitris Kavallieros -
Eckert, Claudia -
evaldas＠l3ce.eu -
Jan Hajný -
Jean-Luc Danger -
mchoras＠itti.com.pl -
Michael Meier -
Miguel Correia -
Nelson Escravana -
Pascal Steichen -
Ruiz Ibañez, Pilar -
Thanasis Sfetsos