If you are an IFM Stakeholder you are very welcome to join our Forum to learn and to teach, to listen and to discuss, and agree or disagree, but above all, to influence the developments. Please contact johan.van.ieperen@uitp.org for further details on participating in the Forum.
Everybody Local Everywhere
From a public transport customer's point of view, it would be nice to have only one smartcard in your wallet which enables travel everywhere in a familiar way.
For example: the Brussels (MoBIB) card could be compatible with those of Amsterdam (OV-Chipkaart), London (Oyster), Paris (Navigo) and Cologne (((eTicket), but is also recognised on the services of Thalys, Eurostar, TGV and ICE. Instead of nine smartcards you would need only one. The intelligence should thus be enough to understand at least a part of the other schemes so that you can buy a valid ticket for your journey.
Of course, the medium does not have to be a smart card, it could easily be a chip/antenna in your mobile phone or anywhere else. Also the way the media communicate with the underlying system can vary as long as both ends understand each other.
Almost eaqually important is that you are informed about your travel options; that you know how to purchase the right ticket; and that you pay the correct amount. Again, it would be nice if you could do this as you are used to do it in your own city or country. Therefore the idea is that Everybody can travel Everywhere as if it were a local journey.
All these aspects of travel should be seamless: Information - before, during and after the trip; Travel - physical connections and transfers offered by different operators; Fares – one (virtual) ticket for all of the journey; and Payment - your money should end up with the different parties who provided the services you enjoyed.
Focus Paper
UITP's Focus Paper 'Everybody Local Everywhere' strongly recommends that the different Electronic Ticketing solutions that exist today converge, and migrate to only one or possibly only two systems for all of Europe. This will not happen overnight and requires considerable effort. However, the current and future isolated Island Solutions are destined to create costly interoperability problems with neighbouring areas sooner or later. The objective is to avoid the establishment of isolated national and long-lasting solutions and to define roadmaps towards cross boarder interoperability.
The interoperability of organisations is of special importance. One could say that technology itself is advanced enough to fulfil all possible requirements. It is however for the most part our limited scope comprehension and cooperation that is currently hindering progress. The Forum is therefore a great place to get to know each other and to come closer!
The IFM Project was made possible as a direct result form this UITP Focus Paper which insisted that the solution can only be found in setting up the approriate communication platform. You can download the Focus Paper here.
IFM Forum
The Forum can be viewed as the central and open space were people can gather and discuss any IFM issue as they once did in Rome a long time ago. At this Forum, everyone with an interest in interoperable fare management and eTicketing is welcome.
We realise that the level of your knowledge and involvement will depend very much on the state of development in your area. Some areas are more advanced than others; some already have an eTicketing system in place and perhaps a certain level of interoperability in their greater region. Others are currently implementing or still planning. But it is exactly this mix that is required to cover the full spectrum of IFM issues! One thing is clear: you will have to think about interoperability with your neighbours eventhough they might still be light years away from you. Nobody will guarantee that they will hook up with you!
Whatever level you represent, you can passively listen to the IFM Project or guest speakers and learn from their knowledge, or you can actively participate in the discussions to ventilate your opinion if you do not agree or see things differently. Perhaps the speakers are forgetting certain aspects they do not know about or are less familiar with, or because perhaps they do not want to touch upon it.
You can use your own experience or inexperience to bring further arguments on the table. Stupid questions do not exist. All contributions are appreciated; all ideas and suggestions are welcome.
Besides the discussions, this Forum will also help us to protect our interests against none-IFM actors who have conflicting interests. For example: Privacy protection could prevent you from accessing data that would be really valuable for daily operation; demanding that every transaction must be complemented with a receipt which would really slow down the throughput of turnstyles.
Furthermore, the Forum has an important Networking function that allows you to speak with your peers and to exchange best practices. This will help to evaluate and implement new and emerging innovations, to upgrade your security levels and to bench mark your own performance.
IFM Project
The objective of this two year European funded IFM Project is to provide travellers with common styles of contact-less media throughout Europe which can be used for multiple transport products in different geographic areas. Today, existing smartcards are mostly restricted to specific city or regional geographies.
The IFM Project consists of the following parts:
- Trust Model (how can we trust the others, our partners?)
- Privacy Model (usage of generated data for marketing / operation)
- Applications and Interoperable Media (downloading or not, card or mobile)
- IFM Organisation (role model, who does what / responsibilities)
- IFM Back Office ICT systems (small or large / what should it do?)
- UITP IFM Forum (for consensus and dissemination)
Consortium Members of the IFM Project are: ITSO, VDV, Calypso, RATP and the universities of Newcastle and Paris.
The Trust Model
A Trust Model is a tool that helps one visualize and understand the degree of confidence that is intentionally or unintentionally granted to individuals and/or systems, based on the associated risks that are inherent with granting this confidence. The more completely the trust model is defined, the greater awareness one will gain of the threats and vulnerabilities and especially the risks based on those threats and vulnerabilities.
The Trust Model should describe how trusted transactions can be made between different fare areas when an unknown customer uses an unknown smart card.
As an example: Let us assume it is possible for a regular customer of STIB in Brussels to use his MoBiB card for travelling in London. How do his Euros finally end up as British Pounds in the pocket of Transport for London? How can you be sure that the transaction is at all genuine?
How can you be sure that the other IFM Region is not cheating with you by increasing the figures?
Of course, no system is completely fail proof and things can and will go wrong. But what are the weaknesses of the system? What is the so called residual risk that needs to be accepted between IFM areas (who pays for the losses)?
How can transactions be done when the systems are off-line?
One factor that makes this WP very complicated is that IFM Systems should be designed as open systems. The associated 'trust model' is far more complex than the alternative 'deny model' which is rather based on the initial refusal of access. How can you be sure that you are guarding all the doors?
Who can guarantee the authentication processes, confidentiality, and integrity of data transferred? Who has the ability to hold transacting parties accountable? Should this be done centrally and if yes by whom?
There are many questions like this that need to be addressed. In this Forum you can raise your own concerns.
This first working package, lead by ITSO, will determine the minimum of common features - the features that are required from an interoperable point of view - of an European Trust Model and the requirements for an European Secure Application Module (EU-SAM).
Privacy is the ability of an individual to seclude (or withdraw) himself and by doing so to prevent revealing himself selectively. What constitutes an actual invasion of privacy can be different for each individual.
The last years have seen an increasing attention on privacy-aware technologies and mechanisms for the negotiation of private information between customers and enterprises. Personal identities and profiles are becoming more important as they enable interactions and transactions in inter-enterprise environments, on the web, in federated e-commerce sites and in mobile environments. The related easier gathering and transmission of such information give rise to a number of threats on peoples privacy. These threads need to be analysed and addressed in a holistic way that still focuses on people and the protection of peoples privacy.
On the other hand, of course, it should still be possible to act in the interest of our public transport customers! Interoperability requires the sharing of sensitive data with strangers.
We do not have to take on the world. Again we have to focus on the aspect of Interoperability. Still, the requirements are different from country to country and they can be, but there needs to be a common level between these countries for Interoperability to be functional.
Indeed locally, the Privacy requirements on sharing data can definitely be decisive in what we can do with the potentially generated data.
In the Forum you can explore the possibilities and the boundaries to collecting data. You can help shape the process to have maybe special Privacy conditions for IFM Areas...
This second work package, lead by UPX (Université de Paris X - Nanterre) will review the needs for privacy of personal data. It will ensure the adequate consideration of the fundamental right of privacy.
The third working package is about Applications and Interoperable Media and concerns technical front-end interoperability.
If you do not know immediately what 'applications, 'multi-applications' or what i'nteroperable media' are, do not worry. This is only the latest jargon. Today applications are called projects, products are tickets, and media are like the old smart cards but now the chip and antenna sit in mobile phone, a PDA or any other gadget (form factor). At the UITP IFM Forum you can learn what is behind these words.
This work package is also about security aspects, life cycles and application management. It is about migration of older systems to be compatible with other systems in the future as much as possible.
This working package will probably also reveal what the generic model of European interoperability will look like. It will investigate the approach of locally downloading 'projects' upon a compatible customer media that can contain products. And in a similar way perhaps also the Security Access Modules could be handled.
Finally, this work package, lead by RATP (Régie Autonome des Transports Parisiens) will ensure the interoperability of applications in an emerging European IFM system and the common requirements for using common media across the different schemes.
Work package 4 is about the IFM organisation or role models. It will define common organisational models and it will investigate how existing national organisations and key regional or city implementations can one day be interoperable.
Basically, each organisation behind every Greater Region has to be able to cope with the responsibilities that are required by the other working packages such as the Trust and Privacy Models, and the technical interoperability of the media and back-offices:
- Identify the common requirements for transport contact less media,
- Identify the benefits of multi-application media to enlarge interoperability,
- Define common requirements on interoperable contact less media and multi-application management for Public Transport,
- Issue recommendations for migration.
VDV Core Application is leader of this work package.
The fifth working package deals with the IFM Back Office ICT (information and communication technology) systems.
This WP will determine the necessary ICT requirements for interoperability between IFM systems. It will enable common Business Rules, procedures, messaging and other relationships that can ensure the system-wide back office interoperability.
CONTACT:
