4 ms·

This is a great list. I would add six more: * Requires a computer with <OS list> to function * Requires that software be installed from <list of app stores>

This is a great list. I would add six more: * Requires a computer with <OS list> to function * Requires that software be installed from <list of app stores> * Device data format is documented * Deivce software can be replaced with independently developed software, but might require NDA or other agreement with the company * Device software can be replaced independent of the company, but might might require NDA or other agreement with a third party (chip maker, etc.) * Hardware is fully documented

jacquesm 7y ago
Wow, that's a great addition, I will update the post. Never even thought about these. Ok done. I merged two of your points and added yet another one.
- rubidium 7y ago
  I think a couple of these stretch the credulity of being criteria of a “safe” device, compared to your original list. The hardware/software must be fully documented reads as “must be open source”. There needs to be some incentive for quality vendors to get in the game, and most (all?) of them want to take some measures to ensure no one steals their design.
  - jacquesm 7y ago
    Open means auditable which should be safer, and also will help to keep the device running if the service on the other side disappears. After all there are trade-offs here, for instance one device might be open source on the device but talking to a service vs a closed source device using an open protocol. My own main gripe with the idea is that people in general just don't seem to care at all, it's just a few hardcore tech people that see where this is all headed.
oezi 7y ago
The most important thing is still missing: * Device will receive security updates until <date>. It always astounds me that the Android security update debacle has not made this a mandatory statement that all devices must contain. Of course this needs to be backed up with a consumer law to allow returns of all devices for a full refund which have a vulnerability which is unpatched 90 days after disclosure.

jacquesm 7y ago

Wow, that's a great addition, I will update the post. Never even thought about these. Ok done. I merged two of your points and added yet another one.

rubidium 7y ago
I think a couple of these stretch the credulity of being criteria of a “safe” device, compared to your original list. The hardware/software must be fully documented reads as “must be open source”. There needs to be some incentive for quality vendors to get in the game, and most (all?) of them want to take some measures to ensure no one steals their design.
- jacquesm 7y ago
  Open means auditable which should be safer, and also will help to keep the device running if the service on the other side disappears. After all there are trade-offs here, for instance one device might be open source on the device but talking to a service vs a closed source device using an open protocol. My own main gripe with the idea is that people in general just don't seem to care at all, it's just a few hardcore tech people that see where this is all headed.

oezi 7y ago

The most important thing is still missing: * Device will receive security updates until <date>. It always astounds me that the Android security update debacle has not made this a mandatory statement that all devices must contain. Of course this needs to be backed up with a consumer law to allow returns of all devices for a full refund which have a vulnerability which is unpatched 90 days after disclosure.