3 ms·
As much as I appreciate the cynicism of your comment, it doesn't really answer OP's question which started off with: > Suppose I want to design an internet-of-
by codethief 6y ago
As much as I appreciate the cynicism of your comment, it doesn't really answer OP's question which started off with:
> Suppose I want to design an internet-of-things device with security in mind […]
Meanwhile, half of your answer is spent discussing whether or not OP might need internet access, when in reality this is already a given. In short, you are talking about general "smart devices" but smart devices ⊋ IoT devices.
- pavel_lishin 6y ago> Meanwhile, half of your answer is spent discussing whether or not OP might need internet access, when in reality this is already a given. Might be a case of the XY problem: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/XY_problem https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/XY_problem OP's problem of "how do I secure my IoT device" might go away entirely if they don't actually need it to be an IoT device. But without some knowledge of what they're building and why, all we can do is guess.
- ryandrake 6y agoYea, that was the point, layered under a little snark. Time saved up front by relaxing the requirements so that you don't need a backend service or Internet means you don't even have to think about x509 provisioning.
- coupdejarnac 6y agoFrankly, this thread would have been better off without your response. I don't need my use case second guessed because you have an ax to grind with other irresponsible IoT products.
- coupdejarnac 6y agoAlternatively, you could take my question at face value. Let's assume I'm an engineer who isn't a complete imbecile who has given the issue some thought already.