Podcast: Will eSIM enable IoT security at scale?

In the latest Trending Tech podcast we discuss the hopes in IoT for enhanced security and more efficient, lower cost operations. What role will be played by eSIM, iSIM, remote SIM provisioning and subscription management? And to tell us who’s adopting the tech and why, we have expert input from Loic Bonvarlet of IoT security enabler Kigen, and Matt Hatton from analysts Transforma Insights.

Jeremy Cowan  00:04

Hi, and welcome to the latest Trending Tech podcast brought to you by IoT-Now.com, VanillaPlus and The Evolving Enterprise. My name’s Jeremy Cowan and I’m co-founder of these three technology sites. Today, the pod is taking a different format; I want you to imagine us sharing a smokeless fireside chat, enjoying a beverage of our choice, even if we’re actually distributed across Europe, nursing a coffee. This is the power of the podcast.

Our sponsor today is Kigen, a company that describes itself as “securing connectivity made simple”. Basically, Kigen enables businesses to grow their Internet of Things rapidly by integrating trust and security through SIM, eSIM and iSIM technologies. Kigen came about as a result of incubation and investment after it was acquired in 2017 by ARM Holdings from eSIM pioneers Simulity Labs, which started life in 2009. The next step was for Kigen UK Ltd, to be spun out into a newly-created company in 2020. And it’s separated officially from ARM in 2021. So, Kigen’s mission is to drive eSIM and iSIM to be the cornerstone of IoT security. And to explain the complexities of something that sounds deceptively simple, I’m delighted to introduce the first of our two guests today, Loic Bonvarlet, who is Kigen’s vice president of Product Marketing. He is an IoT professional, with over 20 years of experience, including 10 years in the USA, holding senior roles in Product Marketing, Technical Sales, Application Engineering and Research and Development. Loic, welcome to the Trending Tech podcast.

Loic Bonvarlet  02:04

Hi, Jeremy. Very pleased to be here.

Jeremy Cowan  02:06

Great to have you there. And it’s always a pleasure to welcome Matt Hatton back to the podcast. Matt is a respected commentator and technology industry expert, also with more than 20 years’ experience at the forefront of technology research. And in his case, consulting. Through his work at Transforma Insights, a research firm that he co founded, he is known as a thought leader in the Internet of Things and digital transformation. Welcome, Matt.

Matt Hatton  02:35

Thank you, Jeremy. And I will do my utmost to live up to that billing.

Jeremy Cowan  02:40

No problem for you, I know. Gentlemen, let’s jump straight into the discussion. We’re going to focus on parts of the new Trending Tech Report, which listeners can download free of charge at trendingtech.io . It’s headlined ‘Will e-sim enable IoT security at scale?” Matt, I’m gonna come to you first, if I may. In general terms, what’s going on with eSIM, iSIM, and their variants, along with remote sim provisioning – or RSP in the inevitable jargon – subscription management and so on? Who’s adopting it and why?

Matt Hatton  03:19

You’ve got to have a three letter acronym, don’t you Jeremy, for just about everything. Yeah. eSIM, okay… So, the technology is more or less there. I think there’s still some debates about there’s a couple of variants of of eSIM; one, aimed mostly at the consumer one aimed mostly at M2M (machine-to-machine communications), there’s a little bit of discussion in the IoT industry about maybe using the consumer one for IoT, as well. And that’s a topic perhaps we’ll come back to. But ostensibly, the technology is there, and it’s been there for a fair few years. You know, we’ve seen RFPs from a whole bunch of different sectors that were issued with the requirement for eSIM for remote management over-the-air control for IMSI swapping, and so forth. So, it’s nothing new, really. But I think the conversation has gone on to one about the commercial realities of it nowadays, rather than necessarily, does the technology work, although it has maybe still some discussion there. But the thing is, it’s never really been used, particularly in anger, shall we say? It’s been used quite a lot for bootstrapping, you know, for setting that initial profile, very useful for supply chain efficiencies and so forth, but not really for porting huge fleets of devices from one operator to another. And I think that the commercial reality is that maybe the network operators are still getting to grips with some of the commercial and operational issues associated with it; handing a connection over to an operator in another market, or how do you continue to manage it on your platforms? What do you do with that? That still remains an issue. 
 Who it’s not an issue for though is the MVNOs. And you see a lot of the virtual network operators, really embracing this as a technology and almost positioning themselves as eSIM providers in a funny kind of way. So, we’re seeing quite an active push from a lot of the MVNOs because, for them, it’s about switching between profiles of different operators that they have already existing commercial relationships with. So, for them, it makes it makes a bit more sense. So, we tend to see it focus more as I see it from the MVNOs’ side, than necessarily the network operator side. 

Jeremy Cowan  05:42

Loic, what would you add to that? I mean, I know particularly there’s been a move into smart metering. What else would you like to sort of explore at this point?

Loic Bonvarlet  05:51

Yeah. So originally, I would say historically, the auto industry has been a big driver for that. But with the requirement that the OEM wanted to really control their connectivity, integrate with all their connectivity suppliers, and it was quite heavy lifting, and in some ways, it still is, right? But I think the point from Matt on the MVNOs, I think is quite interesting. And I can clearly see that in attraction when we sell an ISP to MVNOs, and we have a number of them as customers is really a desire to simplify a bit the management of all their different connectivity options. Till now a lot of them were struggling with proprietary multi-IMSI platforms, with OTA platforms to switch between profile and IMSIs, etc. And more and more you have the reflection to say as an aggregator, how do I get all these profiles aggregated in a future-proof way? Right. And we believe that eSIM, in that sense, allows to not only manage, you know, IMSI switching configurations, etc., but also manage the whole profile, right? And ultimately, future-proof should your acquisition changes in the portfolio of connectivity, etc.
 The other point I would make is to say also that one of the difficulties of growing the eSIM market has been the fact that it was still some heavy lifting right to do when you integrate at the device level. And the other movement we start to see is that the module makers, start to see the benefit of baking in connectivity into the offering. You have the trailblazer Sierra Wireless, who we work with notably on the eSIM, that has pushed this model very far. But now I think more and more of the module makers see that the pressure on ASP on hardware is very high, right. And baking in connectivity right from the get go into their products, is making sense, not only to simplify the adopters to go cellular, but also really to increase the long tail opportunities, I would say, to reach to the developer before. Cellular’s not for me, because if I go to it’s a big MNO, no chance that will ever get even an answer or even a SIM card right to get going. And so people like you know, Hologram, like this player will combine connectivity and hardware have started to address this long tail of cellular which to me is what is going to drive the future, you know, application and innovation because we will have some successful companies among these developers. 

Jeremy Cowan  08:43

Matt, do you have some thoughts on that? 

Matt Hatton  08:44

Yeah, I do. And I think this this idea of the OEM, the hardware OEM as really a driver of connectivity adoption is an interesting one. Because we have had for many years, for decades, this sort of concept of the hardware manufacturer like Sierra Wireless or whatever, as a one-stop-shop. Okay, one-stop-shop. That’s it. That’s a fine principle. But the reality is, if you buy both your things from one, one vendor for no other reason that they happen to sell both of them, you’ll probably end up paying a bit more for both. Okay, it’d be a bit more convenient, but you’ll end up paying a little bit more for both. But I think there’s been a switch in the in the industry in the last year or two, which makes that combination of hardware and connectivity that bit more important, and that bit more relevant. And you’ve got to do rather more optimisation of the devices to suit the network, particularly with the introduction of some of the low power technologies, so NB-IoT and LTE-M and you see much more of a requirement for that optimisation there compared to … OK, in the 2G world you stuck any SIM in any devices, Docker, any network in the world, and it more or less works with about the same sort of sort of capabilities. But that’s no longer the case, you’ve got different networks working with different capabilities. And actually there’s much more of a requirement to optimise that. And also, this concept of being kind of platform ready, I guess we see it from Verizon and Telefonica and a few others, where there’s a range of devices that they put out in the market that are already set and ready to directly connect to their platforms optimised for those. So, I’m finding that there’s more of a requirement for integration through the stack, just for optimising the experience for the user rather than just being easier to buy.

Jeremy Cowan  10:44

Matt, one, I’ve got you wanted to move into another area, can we drill down into using the secure element as a route of trust, including some discussion around IoT SAFE? Perhaps you could unpack that a bit? And, briefly, can you set this in the broader context of IoT security? 

Matt Hatton  11:04

Yeah, absolutely. I think Loic is more an expert on this particular spot than me, but I can offer a few a few first comments. So, the the idea with IoT SAFE is to provide a mechanism for Transport layer security, but in a connectionless way. Okay? Now, let me unpack that a little bit. IoT likes connectionless architectures, okay. So, you don’t have to establish a handshake between one device and a back-end server in order to be exchanging data, it likes to just be able to send. And with IoT SAFE, you can use the SIM as a mechanism for implementing security end to end for the for the sending and receiving of data without needing a connection-oriented architecture. So, it’s really that. It’s establishing that greater level of security and therefore, trust in cellular connectivity, and specifically IoT, cellular connectivity. Loic, you can probably explain it a little bit more in depth and better than me, but that’s kind of how I see it.

Loic Bonvarlet  12:16

Yeah, no, thanks for the intro there, Matt. I think, and I’m looking back in history, when I started my career in IoT back in the 2000s, right? Identifying a device was relating directly to some manufacturing aspects, a serial number or an IEI of the telco provider of the device, or an IMSI from the telco provider, and basically giving a somewhat public ID to identify your device and accept it on to your solution. And now, I think everybody sees the shortcoming of that, in the sense that yeah, anybody can pick up that it’s even on barcodes, etc. And it was relatively easy, I would say, to add a device to access an ecosystem and to access the back end and potentially do malicious things. Right? 
 So, like we do on internet where, I think now, in this space, of, you know, very techie professionals, we all are very confident in the process of internet security for day to day life, buying stuff, etc. IoT SAFE is effectively giving the same peace of mind to have a session secure between a device and the back-end server through what we call it, the TLS, the transport layer for security. And so, this allows us to give a private set of keys to a device which are uniquely diversified in a very similar way to how everybody relies on the security of their mobile phone and their SIM to identify to the network. And I have to say that this industry has a pretty good track record to say there was no major breach in cellular, other than maybe with very consequent means of, you know, investigation and spying effectively. But for the day to day operation, I mean, people trust that their conversations are private, etc. And that’s extending these concepts to the application, right, the application was really lagging behind in terms of security. And now, we are trying to really implement really a catch up to say we have a similar level of security for the application and transporting the data safely from the device all the way to the back office of your server where you’re going to process this data. So that’s kind of the evolution I see very much as a catch up on the application.

Jeremy Cowan  14:47

Staying with you Loic, can we talk a little about the disruption of the supply chain in the SIM space, trying to come closer to OEM and device maker constraints. What do you say to that?

Loic Bonvarlet  14:59

Yeah, so that’s something also we’ve seen, and we are trying to enable, you know, in the sense that to date, the SIM supply chain was a complete different stream from the hardware device, supply chain, right. And the problem with that is that you create friction effectively, in the sense that as a device maker first, most likely, if I’m a newcomer, I don’t have expertise on this telco flows necessarily, when I’ve not done cellular myself before. And so, to find a way to introduce, let’s say, the constraints of telco and cellular into my manufacturing, into the different steps of releasing a device to the field is kind of cumbersome, right. And for old-timer industries it’s fine, it’s all controlled. But for new guys, that’s part of the friction that maybe refrain them to go cellular. So, what we are trying to achieve as Kigen is really, notably with the big operators such as Vodafone and AT&T, to convince them that they have to work with the OEM space to grow the markets to make it simpler to go cellular. And that comes by taking into account the constraints of, well, my device needs to be very small, my device needs to be very power-efficient – and I’m sure Matt can speak a lot to the five Ps that they’ve identified there – but to say, how does the SIM fit into those constraints? And how is it inserted into the device manufacturing chain, maybe it’s going to be still with a plastic SIM, maybe it’s going to be with an eSIM, maybe an integrated SIM, because again, power constraint, size, etc. But this is a choice that the telco industry, and as enabler at Kigen, we can help the OEM do and find the best solution for their device, right? There is no I would say any more one-size-fits-all SIM for the device maker. And Kigen is able to deliver connectivity to these OEMs in the right form factor for them that we are trying to instigate, and that we actually see with some initiatives. 

Jeremy Cowan  17:08

Interesting. Matt, Loic has already referenced the five Ps that you’ve identified. Could you elaborate a bit on that, because not everyone will have read the report yet. And hopefully, they’re going to, after listening to you.

Matt Hatton  17:19

I can indeed. So the five Ps are the things that we see as constraining IoT and the limitations that anybody developing an IoT solution has to work under, and they are: Power, access to power, you’ve got a lot of devices or a lot of potential devices that may not have direct access to mains power, and therefore you want them to be battery powered. So, keeping power consumption down, obviously extends battery life, and that’s a great benefit.
 Processing. So, the available processing on the device.
 The Place, i.e. the geographical location where they might be.
 The Price, because you want to hit as low a price point as you possibly can.
 And what we’ve described as Proportions. I wanted to hit another P, so I’ve had to find another word to fit in with the size, but proportions seemed to be the apt one. So, sometimes you’ve got to fit your capabilities within a certain footprint on a device. And all of these things are restrictions that need to be overcome. And, typically, it’s a trade-off between them. But the introduction of all of these various different new tools like eSIM, iSIM, the Low Power Wide Area technologies, the IoT-specific protocols, there’s a whole load of things happening, that remove or mitigate some of those constraints. And that’s particularly I think, relevant in the context of price. Because if we want to hit billions of connected devices, we need to do that at as low a price point as we possibly can. And that points towards things like using low power technologies, because the chipsets are typically cheaper, using something iSIM, because the reality is that it’s going to be cheaper, because it’s embedded. It’s also going to be lower power consumption, and so on. And a lot of the time we were thinking about all of these various trade-offs between the different elements and the new technologies and how they impact on those.
 Jeremy Cowan  19:34

Loic, is there anything you’d add to what Matt has outlined?

Loic Bonvarlet  19:37

Yeah. So maybe coming back to the supply chain change right. It means also that you know, this Secure Enclave right are more widely available because of the integration. And so now you have more and more devices or modules that effectively de facto have a SAFE which is part of the hardware, right, which is not strictly dependant to, let’s say, a connectivity provider. And that’s also the other revolution, we are trying to support. And to an extent is to say, this Secure Enclave is usable for the telco authentication, that is primary usage, but for the application, and so we have the IoT safe application, which is chip-to-cloud authentication. 
You can also, if you push a bit further, have more and more capabilities on processing locally, right. You will receive an amount of data locally and to reduce you’re also power consumption footprint, environmental footprint, etc., you want to do more and more local processing, meaning that companies more and more spend efforts implementing their know-how, their knowledge on the data that is collected in a field at the edge, right. And so this Secure Enclave, these root of trust capabilities can be used also to secure the data locally, to process it right, and to protect the IP and the knowledge of these companies. And that’s something that we work a lot with companies such as Edge Impulse or players in the AI and ML specialists to explore right from the get go in their framework, these kinds of Secure Enclave and root of trust capabilities.

Matt Hatton  21:19

That’s a really interesting conclusion. Because it’s obviously the rise of edge computing is one of the key trends affecting IoT, putting more capability, more processing, on the edge device, which processing was one of our one of our Ps. But maybe you trade off having more processing in exchange for having a lower bandwidth connection, and therefore extending the battery life, you know, there’s all of these trade-offs. But if you’re putting more processing on the edge device, you’re not just sending a stream of data, you’re putting, as you say, some of the IP onto the edge device (intellectual property, rather than internet protocol, in this in this instance. We need to sort out our IP, in this case) but yeah, putting some of your IP onto that edge device is pretty critical. So, I find that an intriguing area. 

Jeremy Cowan  22:09

Matt, can we step back for a moment and broaden this out? Let’s have a look at the bigger picture of service provider IoT strategies and the changing approaches. Transforma Insights has a new CSP IoT benchmarking report due out at the end of this month. Without giving any huge spoilers what highlights can you share from that?

Matt Hatton  22:33

Yeah, it’s one of our tentpole reports for the year is the CSP IoT benchmarking report. And in fact, a little plug, we have a free webinar on 9th November that anybody can attend. Check it out on our on our website. Highlights? Well, actually, I’m going to revert back to something that I wrote, which gives some context. We published a report about something we’re terming “$1 IoT”. Okay, so this concept that the revenue from cellular or the spend on cellular IoT connectivity is trending towards $1 per year. And I think we’re seeing that something approaching that in China already. If you look at the net adds for a lot operators, it’s heading that way. I mean, we’re around about $1 a month for most operators at the moment, but it’s probably heading towards $1 a year. And if that’s the scenario that we’re looking at, but certainly a large proportion of that base, are going to be at that sort of a level, what are the implications for that? And that was really the focus of this report.

Now, obviously, to a certain extent, it’s bad news. But to a certain extent it’s also good news, because it opens up the opportunity of using cellular for a whole range of new technologies. But focusing on the bad a little bit. The question is, what do you do as a network operator, as a communication service provider, as an MNO or an MVNO, to mitigate this? And there’s some tried and tested approaches like consolidation, which we are seeing some in the MVNOs’ space, but it’s never going to happen in the network operator space, you know. IoT is 1 to 2 percent of revenue, you’re never going to see operator consolidation off the back of potentially declining margins in cellular IoT connectivity. But what you might see from them is change of tack in other ways.

One is the trusty moving up the stack, which everybody talks about, okay. Sell more vertical solutions, get into automotive,and retail, and utilities and get into all of these vertical sectors, which is all very well, it’s a lot easier said than done. And I mean, a lot easier said than done because effectively, unless you’ve got some kind of differentiator in that space, you’re just another provider and can you really expect to get any significant market share? It’s a tough nut to crack but you can see why that advice gets handed out because 50% to 80% of any solution revenue is in that in that services space. But, as I said, it’s only really viable if you’ve got a differentiator through acquisition or just through some heritage that a certain company has. So, for instance, Verizon went out and bought a shedload of fleet management companies a few years ago, and so it’s established a right to play in that space. And you’ve got others like Telefonica in retail, they’ve always had a retail presence back to even the 1960s, where they were selling streamed muzak to stores. So they’ve had presence in that space for a while. But those are few and far between. But there’s another approach, which we’re terming hyperscale IoT connectivity, which involves a lot of things that are basically aimed at having a set of platforms and internal structures, and so on, that are appropriate for supporting low-cost onboarding, low-touch support for devices, and so on, to ensure that they’re, effectively they’re scalable. That involves things like working very closely with the cloud hyperscalers, and involves getting their own house in order in terms of how they’re structured and organise what their software platforms look like, and so forth. And that’s really the focus of the report; how well have they done at either establishing the vertical credibility in those solutions, or establishing their credibility as hyperscale IoT connectivity providers and working towards that kind of functionality? No one’s quite there yet, but everybody’s making pretty good progress towards the end goal.

Jeremy Cowan  26:45

Loic, what would you add to those observations?

Loic Bonvarlet  26:48

Yeah, and I think it’s a great point, Matt. Upping the stack is easier said than done. And I’ve seen it in my 2000 to 2010 career, right, to see all these MNOs asking for turnkey solutions. And effectively if you don’t acquire a reputable player in a vertical, this is very, very hard to achieve, because those sales force and those staff are not used to sell solutions and all the difficulties of IoT’s, they have to resolve themselves and they are not prepared for that, right? So, I agree upping the stack works well with acquisition. I could quote maybe also Vodafone with Cobra Automotive, for example. And they have reached a certain success through this type of initiative. 
Now, on the point of hyper scaler, I couldn’t agree more, right. Reducing the cost points of platform to onboard fleets, even if they are small, is the key to success, right. So, concepts like zero touch provisioning, concepts, like I can buy in distribution modules ready to connect with credential that can be applied to my AWS IoT account, or my Azure IoT accounts, regardless of the hyperscaler that I choose and working very, very closely with those guys that will enable the long tail right is the key to success. And if the MNO or connectivity supplier at large, don’t work substantially on the simplification. There is no money at 1 dollar per year to be made, right? Because the cost points are still too heavy. So that’s, I think, very, very critical to really take a fresh look at that, and really think of ease of onboarding and giving to the developer the sensation of freedom, right, of ease to onboard to then have them develop and put the technology in the field and ultimately saying, ‘Well, no, I need to scale and I need to reach these big MNOs. And I have a real case’. And maybe the early stage partner MNOs can also that should show that because of this trust, establish really, at the beginning, touch a bit of the value of the end use case rather than just pure connectivity. But they have to make it simpler at the start, I think and we’ve done some work with AWS, on IoT for example, to be very concrete to say you want to have an AWS IoT account, you want to deploy devices on AWS IoT, well, here you go. Take a ready to connect module with IoT SAFE embedded and attach those IDs to your account and you’re done in a matter of a few minutes, rather than many weeks of discussions.

Matt Hatton  29:42

I think it’s a question of tailoring the channels, the pricing, all of these various different elements to the way in which the customer wants to buy. In some cases what you want is a heavy lifting consulting project of which connectivity is a small part. And you know, a lot of the operators have got systems integration arms, they’re all capable of delivering a full Smart Cities solution, for instance. And they’ll include some cellular connectivity as part of that. And obviously, there’s tremendous value in that. And really, the connectivity piece is a small fraction of it. And so you can do a very heavy, consultative selling type approach to it. And then at the other end of the spectrum, you’ve got someone who just wants some SIM cards, and there you’re looking at online channels, you’re looking at reducing the touch points everywhere along the spectrum. And then somewhere in between, you’ve got this concept that I term know-how as a service. It allows for a bit of an extra lift in how in the revenue associated with that, I guess, because what you’re doing is you’re paying for expertise, knowledge in how you deploy IoT, how you get it up and running. It’s not just, I want to buy some data, I also need a bit of assistance. But it’s not this heavy lifting, consulting at the other end of the spectrum. And I think a lot of the operators have got that capability, some of the MVNOs have got that kind of capability, as well. And you have to tailor your channels and your approach and even your platforms and systems that you’re using, depending on which of those types of customers you’re going after.

Jeremy Cowan  31:31

Clearly, you’re both interested in the traction of the MVNOs, showing in moving to eSIM to address various issues. Loic, could you just talk a little bit more – I know you touched on it already –  but being able to unify connectivity options under one roof has to be a benefit. Could you talk a little bit about that?

Loic Bonvarlet  31:54

Yeah, this consolidation that we start to see really in the market, also, because of the price pressure and the proprietary platform, right, there is a really strong desire from all the discussion I may have with MVNOs, to really, you know, aggregate, simplify their platform, and try to take a more standard approach. Whereas before, they had the tendency to, for example, develop homegrown multi IMSI applet and implement a system and develop all that in-house which was great and functioning. But it’s maybe not necessarily operating at the cost point that they need to address LPWAN notably. So, I think that’s, that’s really one of the items. There are still some difficulties around, you know, RSP and LPWAN compatibility, I have to say, we are making strides at Kigen, to try to simplify this game for the MVNOs, for example. We have innovation around reducing the dependency to SMS in M2M RSP. While staying in spec, and I can totally follow up with interested parties on that, we have patented technologies on that. Trying to address real life problem, right. And also in the end, I would say from the the OEM viewpoint effectively, I don’t think they could care less if it’s an M2M or consumer RSP. It’s about solving their problem, right? And taking a real pragmatic view to say, I have this constraint of deploying at first into those countries, do we have the price point for connectivity at this country? And then I need to expand in this country with a local profile, because there is regulatory constraints over their rights, and to adjust the mix of solution. Maybe multi IMSI, maybe some OTA, maybe some RSP to really deliver something that makes sense to the end customer. But ultimately, the move outside to what RSPs is giving a level playing field for the MVNOs to rely on the similar technology to aggregate their footprints.

Jeremy Cowan  34:14

We’re short on time. So gentlemen, I’m just going to ask you both if you would give me a 30 second key message that you think people might take away from our Fireside Chat. Matt, you first, what would you like the listeners to absorb from this?

Matt Hatton  34:31

I think eSIM is a… and iSIM to follow, are inevitably part of the of the IoT mix. They’re essential for supply chain simplification, for reducing costs, reducing power consumption, for generally being able to support the ambitions for global IoT connectivity deployments. And I think it’s not a question of if but when it becomes pretty much the default. The question is still to resolve some of the commercial and operational issues that sit around that. And I would encourage everybody to focus a bit of attention on that.

Jeremy Cowan  35:19

Well, hopefully they can have a look at the report and your CSP benchmark report when that’s out. When will that be?

Matt Hatton  35:28

That will be out on 28th of October.

Jeremy Cowan  35:32

And they can see that on your site, which is …

Matt Hatton  35:35


Jeremy Cowan  35:36

Great, Transforma with an A isn’t it. Loic, what would you like people to take away from our discussion today?

Loic Bonvarlet  35:45

Yeah, so I would say that first maybe integration is the trajectory of history, right. Integration in the secure IC in chips industries is just a natural evolution to provide more performance, lower power. And, and so Kigen is a strict enabler of that change and that disruption in the cellular space, right, and one of my key motto, as being the product of Kigan, is really to simplify, again, to be able to reduce the cost points for the chain, to deploy and have more people attempt to go cellular, right? Not everybody will be successful, right? You still have, at first, to make sure you do have the business cases, your business cases, not just I want to connect, because then you’re going off the rails very quickly, right. You need to have a clear ROI value proposition for your service. But when you do have that, then making it simpler to access the security, implementing security from the get go, secure by design approach, chip to cloud approach, working with hyper scaler, then we can have a boatload of companies going to try. And that’s for the benefit of, you know, services rendered to the greater public, security by default and more trust into the device that we interact with every day. Right. And that’s to me also a key goal to enable that trust by default, rather than should I already go and use the service. So yeah, that’s I would say my message for today

Jeremy Cowan  37:20

It’s a good summary. Well, if anybody else wants a further summary, then have a look at our report, which as I say, is at TrendingTech.io . And there’s an 18-page free report, featuring Kigen and Transforma and many other experts. Gentlemen, that’s all we have time for. I really want to thank you for spending time with our listeners, Matt, it’s been great to have you here.

Matt Hatton  37:43

Thank you, Jeremy. My pleasure.

Jeremy Cowan  37:45

Loic, we really appreciate all your expertise.

Loic Bonvarlet  37:47

Thanks a lot, Jeremy. It was a pleasure to discuss with you both today.

Jeremy Cowan  37:51

Good, have you. Before we go, let me just say we’ve got some more great podcasts in the pipeline. So, keep an eye out for them by bookmarking IoT-Now.com for the latest global IoT news and features. And join us soon for the next Trending Tech podcast. Bye for now.

By continuing to use the site, you agree to the use of cookies. more information

The cookie settings on this website are set to "allow cookies" to give you the best browsing experience possible. If you continue to use this website without changing your cookie settings or you click "Accept" below then you are consenting to this.