3 ms·

I agree with you. IoT devices inside a SOHO should communicate externally through a proxy gateway device. IoT devices should only have communications in a p2p

• Pxtl 10y ago
  The router could provide password-protected web proxy to access the LAN IOT webserver. Then you've reduced the attack surface to the router. It almost seems like we need some protocol extensions: 1) Standard auth protocol (not just web-based) for the router to protect the local computers. Some kind of user-and-software-friendly firewall. This could even extend to game servers and whatnot - what if the "shared password" for connecting to a hosted game server had the shared password implemented at router protocol level? 2) DHCP registration on a network should require a name, one that the user was prompted to provide at some point. No more identifying devices on you router by IP or MAC. You already need to provide a name for SMB or DNS, just finish the job and name all DHCP clients. Possibly this should work with DNS in some way. This way user-friendly logging information can be presented to the user. Without that, routers don't have the critical information needed to tell the user which device is screwing up. Edit: Google tells me this is already a thing... Sadly, good conformance on providing meaningful DHCP client names won't happen unless the FCC et al start testing IP-enabled devices for it.