3 ms·

All of those are great use-cases. But do you really want each of those devices to be added to the external threat surface? Perhaps it would be better to have ev

by mbreese 10y ago

All of those are great use-cases. But do you really want each of those devices to be added to the external threat surface? Perhaps it would be better to have everything talk to a central hub over a local protocol (ZigBee, Bluetooth, etc) and then that hub be the main connection out to the Internet at large. As it is now, it's still a bit of a free for all. And at least if you have a hub model where you can secure that one device (or replace it if it is compromised), you don't have to replace all of your individual IoT devices when something bad does happen. A good example of this is my garage door opener. Instead of building a WiFi connection into the opener itself, there is a separate little gateway device that sits inside my house. The gateway talks to the door (RF) and to the Internet (ethernet). I can still control my garage door, but if something is compromised, I can always detach that gateway and still have a working (secure) garage door.

Klathmon 10y ago
It seems so silly to me to not use the ubiquitous "RF" broadcasting stations already in everyone's house, that also includes an "okay" addressing system, a security firewall, high bandwidth communications protocol, and more. Why not focus on software which can use WiFi more securely and with a better focus on local connectivity? I can understand the "ultra low power" needs, but many of these devices are mains powered, and that's not really a concern. But yes, what I do right now for the most part is use z-wave which is connected to a central "hub" which is then connected to the outside world. But IMO that's a hacky-workaround for this problem, not a real solution.
jaclaz 10y ago
OT, but not much, there was a story recently about the Garadget: https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=14029572 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=14029572 which shows some of the risks of an internet connected device (no, it is not about lack of security)
ryandrake 10y ago
This is a great idea, but it would inevitably fail. All we'd end up with is each and every IoT company coming out with their own "hub" product that only works with it's own devices. Want to control Philips Hue bulbs? You have to have a Philips IoT hub connected to the Internet. Belkin smart plugs? They'll connect only to a Belkin smart hub. Xyz Manufacturer sprinkler system? Xyz hub. Oh, and by the way, those hubs will all have insecure software thrown together by an underpaid E.E. too.

by mbreese 10y ago

Klathmon 10y ago

It seems so silly to me to not use the ubiquitous "RF" broadcasting stations already in everyone's house, that also includes an "okay" addressing system, a security firewall, high bandwidth communications protocol, and more. Why not focus on software which can use WiFi more securely and with a better focus on local connectivity? I can understand the "ultra low power" needs, but many of these devices are mains powered, and that's not really a concern. But yes, what I do right now for the most part is use z-wave which is connected to a central "hub" which is then connected to the outside world. But IMO that's a hacky-workaround for this problem, not a real solution.

jaclaz 10y ago

OT, but not much, there was a story recently about the Garadget: https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=14029572 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=14029572 which shows some of the risks of an internet connected device (no, it is not about lack of security)

ryandrake 10y ago

This is a great idea, but it would inevitably fail. All we'd end up with is each and every IoT company coming out with their own "hub" product that only works with it's own devices. Want to control Philips Hue bulbs? You have to have a Philips IoT hub connected to the Internet. Belkin smart plugs? They'll connect only to a Belkin smart hub. Xyz Manufacturer sprinkler system? Xyz hub. Oh, and by the way, those hubs will all have insecure software thrown together by an underpaid E.E. too.