4 ms·

> The project is built around a shared belief that smart home devices should be secure, reliable, and seamless to use. By building upon Internet Protocol (IP),

by m-p-3 7y ago

> The project is built around a shared belief that smart home devices should be secure, reliable, and seamless to use. By building upon Internet Protocol (IP), the project aims to enable communication across smart home devices, mobile apps, and cloud services and to define a specific set of IP-based networking technologies for device certification. Yet I don't see any mention of making those being able to work completely offline/standalone. We rely too much on cloud services that ultimately get turned off after an undetermined about of time. There is no way I am buying home automation equipment I cannot control myself, especially in a situation where the giants like Google could simply decide to terminate my account because I said or did something they didn't like and take down related systems with it.

AgloeDreams 7y ago
Reading though it seems like a common universal standard that fully removes the need for third party services as all devices will adhere to a common standard. (I"m sure all of these will offer third party apps and all that still) but if you look at something like Homekit smart plugs, you can configure many of them without ever using anything but the Home App, just scan and go. Done right, this standard could make these devices never need third party services, just local networking. Seems like the goal, obviously I agree with you that it should be a stated priority.
mr__y 7y ago
"Since your recent comment does not meet our Community Standards(tm) your account has been suspended for a period of 28 days*. Additionally you will not be able to turn on the lights during that period and your microwave usage will be limited to 90 seconds daily."
oflannabhra 7y ago
I'm not sure what you are expecting here. CHoIP would define messaging that certified products must implement, meaning that an Amazon device and an Apple device would send the same message to a Phillips light to turn it on, and that message would be carried over IP. The messaging would be agnostic of where the source is. It could be a device in the local network, or it could be a cloud-based service (assuming you open up your network). HomeKit, for example, works locally, either over BLE or WiFi.
- olyjohn 7y ago
  I still have to have an iCloud account to use HomeKit. So does it really matter if it works locally or not?
joshstrange 7y ago
I am personally really against my IoT devices being able to "speak" TCP/IP, I want them to use dumb radios (Z-wave or if I must, Zigbee) that cannot talk to the internet. I get the draw of Wifi/IP devices but I avoid them at all costs. I don't want 10's or 100's of devices on my network that all are talking to servers in China. I bought a few cheap POE Chinese cameras that I use with Zoneminder but they are all blocked from any internet access except talking to Zoneminder (local).
- spsful 7y ago
  I would agree but there is quite a benefit to having these smart devices connect to technology already in the home. With the absence of a proprietary radio, it's easier for me to control them as well. I currently have firewall rules on my network that blocks all communication between my smart devices and the internet. They can only communicate on the LAN and cannot send/receive information outside of the network. I feel like if more proprietary communication protocols were implemented it would be hard to determine which devices were communicating, and which are accessing the internet(for example if a device has an embedded LTE chip to make up for lack of WiFi connectivity).
- anderspitman 7y ago
  Seems like there might be a market for something like pihole that detects connections to shady IoT servers.
- xoa 7y ago
  >I don't want 10's or 100's of devices on my network that all are talking to servers in China. I definitely agree, although I'd expand that to "talking to any servers at all anywhere for anything I don't explicitly grant permission for". However for that very reason I prefer WiFi/IP devices, because it makes it very easy and straight forward to apply all the powerful network management tools we have for everything else. All devices can go on their own VLANs for example, with careful management and logging of how they communicate. The real shame is that there aren't better, more consumer friendly tools for managing that more visually/automatically. Custom radios aren't any inherent defense there, already there have been demonstrations of getting right into Z-wave/Zigbee networks using customized SDRs. They have a purpose from an ultra low energy and meshing point of view, but you should be suspicious of what security practices for such things will actually be. WiFi/IP at least has the benefit of tons of open attention and development for security critical situations already.

by m-p-3 7y ago

AgloeDreams 7y ago

Reading though it seems like a common universal standard that fully removes the need for third party services as all devices will adhere to a common standard. (I"m sure all of these will offer third party apps and all that still) but if you look at something like Homekit smart plugs, you can configure many of them without ever using anything but the Home App, just scan and go. Done right, this standard could make these devices never need third party services, just local networking. Seems like the goal, obviously I agree with you that it should be a stated priority.

mr__y 7y ago

"Since your recent comment does not meet our Community Standards(tm) your account has been suspended for a period of 28 days*. Additionally you will not be able to turn on the lights during that period and your microwave usage will be limited to 90 seconds daily."

oflannabhra 7y ago

I'm not sure what you are expecting here. CHoIP would define messaging that certified products must implement, meaning that an Amazon device and an Apple device would send the same message to a Phillips light to turn it on, and that message would be carried over IP. The messaging would be agnostic of where the source is. It could be a device in the local network, or it could be a cloud-based service (assuming you open up your network). HomeKit, for example, works locally, either over BLE or WiFi.

olyjohn 7y ago
I still have to have an iCloud account to use HomeKit. So does it really matter if it works locally or not?

joshstrange 7y ago

I am personally really against my IoT devices being able to "speak" TCP/IP, I want them to use dumb radios (Z-wave or if I must, Zigbee) that cannot talk to the internet. I get the draw of Wifi/IP devices but I avoid them at all costs. I don't want 10's or 100's of devices on my network that all are talking to servers in China. I bought a few cheap POE Chinese cameras that I use with Zoneminder but they are all blocked from any internet access except talking to Zoneminder (local).

spsful 7y ago
I would agree but there is quite a benefit to having these smart devices connect to technology already in the home. With the absence of a proprietary radio, it's easier for me to control them as well. I currently have firewall rules on my network that blocks all communication between my smart devices and the internet. They can only communicate on the LAN and cannot send/receive information outside of the network. I feel like if more proprietary communication protocols were implemented it would be hard to determine which devices were communicating, and which are accessing the internet(for example if a device has an embedded LTE chip to make up for lack of WiFi connectivity).
anderspitman 7y ago
Seems like there might be a market for something like pihole that detects connections to shady IoT servers.
xoa 7y ago
>I don't want 10's or 100's of devices on my network that all are talking to servers in China. I definitely agree, although I'd expand that to "talking to any servers at all anywhere for anything I don't explicitly grant permission for". However for that very reason I prefer WiFi/IP devices, because it makes it very easy and straight forward to apply all the powerful network management tools we have for everything else. All devices can go on their own VLANs for example, with careful management and logging of how they communicate. The real shame is that there aren't better, more consumer friendly tools for managing that more visually/automatically. Custom radios aren't any inherent defense there, already there have been demonstrations of getting right into Z-wave/Zigbee networks using customized SDRs. They have a purpose from an ultra low energy and meshing point of view, but you should be suspicious of what security practices for such things will actually be. WiFi/IP at least has the benefit of tons of open attention and development for security critical situations already.