4 ms·

>Amazon FreeRTOS ... and extends it with software libraries that make it easy to securely connect your small, low-power devices to AWS cloud services why do Io

>Amazon FreeRTOS ... and extends it with software libraries that make it easy to securely connect your small, low-power devices to AWS cloud services why do IoT devices have to connect to the cloud? Is there any legitimate use case other than reporting data gathered on the customer? Why do have all these gadgets have to snoop on us?

patja 9y ago
When I think of IoT I think of devices gathering data, and the data has to go somewhere to be useful. What's the alternative to putting it in the cloud, self-hosting the storage? That's what I would do, but I think it is a pretty niche market who wants to deal with the storage, backing it up, etc.
- recursor 9y ago
  IMHO the apps should be storage agnostic, with setup including choosing storage (possibly including paid plans). Meditating that through a standardised storage connector would mean the IoT apps have very little to do. That could be something like SFTP, but there are some interesting things like https://remotestorage.io/ https://remotestorage.io/ that allow you to write your own storage provider so decentralised apps can choose their own data store/change storage later without changing the app.
inamberclad 9y ago
If you're going to sell a consumer an internet connected device, they're probably going to assume that it'll work on its own and they can review and adjust things on a website (that isn't a 192.0.0.*)
- fgonzag 9y ago
  Sadly, thats the IoT world I want to live in. All the devices communicate only through the internal network. This increases security a ton by default. If you want to use it outside your network, then you do it the old fashioned way, by setting up a vpn to your router.
  - ianhowson 9y ago
    I've shipped a few products that work like this, but the support burden is incredible. Practically no users are capable of configuring IP addresses or forwarding ports on their router. Config-by-phone or config-by-cloud is definitely the way to go for consumer gear -- see Roku or Chromecast for great examples.
- smcl 9y ago
  Hm, I wonder if it is just the IP address people don't like to use? Like if it used Bonjour/Avahi and you could (after a bit of initial config) connect to your internet connected lightbulb via http://kitchen-lightbulb.local http://kitchen-lightbulb.local would that be better?
CamperBob2 9y ago
why do IoT devices have to connect to the cloud? Because otherwise you're in the business of explaining to non-technical users how to open up ports in their NAT firewalls and do other fun things required to make the device Just Work(tm) from any Internet connection. It's important IMO for device vendors to offer as many options as possible in that regard. Ideally it should be possible to use a given device with a paid service sponsored by the manufacturer, a free service run by anyone else, a private server running on the customer's own LAN, or with no external servers at all.
notatoad 9y ago
Why do internet of things devices have to connect to the internet? Because that's the whole definition of them. Without an internet connection, it's just a thing.
- MichaelMoser123 9y ago
  devices could be connected on a home network, without calling home.
  - notatoad 9y ago
    they could, but again: then they aren't an internet-of-things device. They could do cool things, but without an internet connection it's not IoT. And the internet connection is the selling feature for most IoT devices. I can turn my dumb non-internet connected thermostat up if i'm at home, the interesting thing about a Nest is that i can turn up the thermostat before i leave work and the house will be warm when i get home. The internet connection is the value-add. If you don't like internet connected devices that's cool, but IoT devices can't have the same feature set if you remove the internet connection. the call-home is not useless. If you want to argue that certain devices don't need an internet connection, that's fine. and in many cases i'd agree. but arguing that the whole class of devices that is defined by being connected to the internet doesn't need an internet connection is pretty silly.
    - MichaelMoser123 9y ago
      If you want to turn on the thermostat from work then it does not need to connect to the cloud, also it would be safer not to expose the thermostat directly to the net - have a more secured control server on your local home network and have that one call the thermostat.
sigstoat 9y ago
> why do IoT devices have to connect to the cloud? to allow a "secure" connection (plus all the snooping and reporting). as near as i can tell, there's no way to concoct a device to run on a home network which an average consumer's browser will be happy talking SSL to. (if anyone knows a way i'd love to hear it.)
- foobard 9y ago
  Lets Encrypt is adding wildcard support in 2018 https://letsencrypt.org/2017/07/06/wildcard-certificates-coming-jan-2018.html https://letsencrypt.org/2017/07/06/wildcard-certificates-com...
  - sigstoat 9y ago
    i don't see how that helps. what wildcard pattern are you thinking will be useful, and issuable?
    - recursor 9y ago
      Not a wildcard solution (or a particularly legit one or one a serious vendor is going to take up, but could work for DIY): DNS poison within LAN (or proper internal DNS, or even HOSTS if DIY) for .product.tld Product initiates letsEncrypt for: uid.product.tld And posts some form of identity proof to vendor, setting up a link to carry out letsEncrypt challenges. Verification negotiated between letsEncrypt and the vendor via public resolution of uid.product.tld Device completes cert process with letsEncrypt and installs cert to the device. LAN now has TLS to uid.device.tld internally (via DNS spoof/poinon) and vendor hasn't seen the cert. (but, if not DIY, the vendor is distributing a DNS poisoner in their product) () Caveat: I've still not set up letsEncrypt in the wild, so don't know it's limitations, but from the doc's the above looks doable. The lack of ability to have a browser TLS to *.local without an internal CA or non-public root and the endpoint management to goes with either is a pain.
rkangel 9y ago
There are some other good reasons mentioned here, but this is the one that makes me glad they are: firmware updates. Insecurely designed, networked embedded devices are a serious issue. Look at the botnet based on CCTV cameras for an example. A company that doesn't care about security is still going to produce crap devices and isn't going to update, but for a company that cares about security, ability to patch devices in the field is an absolute necessity to stay on top of vulnerabilities. The ability to add features and keep your device 'fresh' is a nice bonus.

patja 9y ago

When I think of IoT I think of devices gathering data, and the data has to go somewhere to be useful. What's the alternative to putting it in the cloud, self-hosting the storage? That's what I would do, but I think it is a pretty niche market who wants to deal with the storage, backing it up, etc.

recursor 9y ago
IMHO the apps should be storage agnostic, with setup including choosing storage (possibly including paid plans). Meditating that through a standardised storage connector would mean the IoT apps have very little to do. That could be something like SFTP, but there are some interesting things like https://remotestorage.io/ https://remotestorage.io/ that allow you to write your own storage provider so decentralised apps can choose their own data store/change storage later without changing the app.

inamberclad 9y ago

If you're going to sell a consumer an internet connected device, they're probably going to assume that it'll work on its own and they can review and adjust things on a website (that isn't a 192.0.0.*)

fgonzag 9y ago
Sadly, thats the IoT world I want to live in. All the devices communicate only through the internal network. This increases security a ton by default. If you want to use it outside your network, then you do it the old fashioned way, by setting up a vpn to your router.
- ianhowson 9y ago
  I've shipped a few products that work like this, but the support burden is incredible. Practically no users are capable of configuring IP addresses or forwarding ports on their router. Config-by-phone or config-by-cloud is definitely the way to go for consumer gear -- see Roku or Chromecast for great examples.
smcl 9y ago
Hm, I wonder if it is just the IP address people don't like to use? Like if it used Bonjour/Avahi and you could (after a bit of initial config) connect to your internet connected lightbulb via http://kitchen-lightbulb.local http://kitchen-lightbulb.local would that be better?

CamperBob2 9y ago

why do IoT devices have to connect to the cloud? Because otherwise you're in the business of explaining to non-technical users how to open up ports in their NAT firewalls and do other fun things required to make the device Just Work(tm) from any Internet connection. It's important IMO for device vendors to offer as many options as possible in that regard. Ideally it should be possible to use a given device with a paid service sponsored by the manufacturer, a free service run by anyone else, a private server running on the customer's own LAN, or with no external servers at all.

notatoad 9y ago

Why do internet of things devices have to connect to the internet? Because that's the whole definition of them. Without an internet connection, it's just a thing.

MichaelMoser123 9y ago
devices could be connected on a home network, without calling home.
- notatoad 9y ago
  they could, but again: then they aren't an internet-of-things device. They could do cool things, but without an internet connection it's not IoT. And the internet connection is the selling feature for most IoT devices. I can turn my dumb non-internet connected thermostat up if i'm at home, the interesting thing about a Nest is that i can turn up the thermostat before i leave work and the house will be warm when i get home. The internet connection is the value-add. If you don't like internet connected devices that's cool, but IoT devices can't have the same feature set if you remove the internet connection. the call-home is not useless. If you want to argue that certain devices don't need an internet connection, that's fine. and in many cases i'd agree. but arguing that the whole class of devices that is defined by being connected to the internet doesn't need an internet connection is pretty silly.
  - MichaelMoser123 9y ago
    If you want to turn on the thermostat from work then it does not need to connect to the cloud, also it would be safer not to expose the thermostat directly to the net - have a more secured control server on your local home network and have that one call the thermostat.

sigstoat 9y ago

> why do IoT devices have to connect to the cloud? to allow a "secure" connection (plus all the snooping and reporting). as near as i can tell, there's no way to concoct a device to run on a home network which an average consumer's browser will be happy talking SSL to. (if anyone knows a way i'd love to hear it.)

foobard 9y ago
Lets Encrypt is adding wildcard support in 2018 https://letsencrypt.org/2017/07/06/wildcard-certificates-coming-jan-2018.html https://letsencrypt.org/2017/07/06/wildcard-certificates-com...
- sigstoat 9y ago
  i don't see how that helps. what wildcard pattern are you thinking will be useful, and issuable?
  - recursor 9y ago
    Not a wildcard solution (or a particularly legit one or one a serious vendor is going to take up, but could work for DIY): DNS poison within LAN (or proper internal DNS, or even HOSTS if DIY) for .product.tld Product initiates letsEncrypt for: uid.product.tld And posts some form of identity proof to vendor, setting up a link to carry out letsEncrypt challenges. Verification negotiated between letsEncrypt and the vendor via public resolution of uid.product.tld Device completes cert process with letsEncrypt and installs cert to the device. LAN now has TLS to uid.device.tld internally (via DNS spoof/poinon) and vendor hasn't seen the cert. (but, if not DIY, the vendor is distributing a DNS poisoner in their product) () Caveat: I've still not set up letsEncrypt in the wild, so don't know it's limitations, but from the doc's the above looks doable. The lack of ability to have a browser TLS to *.local without an internal CA or non-public root and the endpoint management to goes with either is a pain.

rkangel 9y ago

There are some other good reasons mentioned here, but this is the one that makes me glad they are: firmware updates. Insecurely designed, networked embedded devices are a serious issue. Look at the botnet based on CCTV cameras for an example. A company that doesn't care about security is still going to produce crap devices and isn't going to update, but for a company that cares about security, ability to patch devices in the field is an absolute necessity to stay on top of vulnerabilities. The ability to add features and keep your device 'fresh' is a nice bonus.