5 ms·

The ikea bulbs are actually pretty good malware wise. The bulbs do not connect to the internet, they use zigbee to communicate with a remote. Which can either b

The ikea bulbs are actually pretty good malware wise. The bulbs do not connect to the internet, they use zigbee to communicate with a remote. Which can either be a dumb offline remote or the gateway device. The gateway also does not connect to the internet, it is local network only and can be hooked up to the Apple/Google/Amazon systems for internet access. If you had to design an IoT bulb, this is the ideal setup.

jfrunyon 5y ago
> The gateway also does not connect to the internet, it is local network only and can be hooked up to the Apple/Google/Amazon systems for internet access. In other words, it does connect to the internet, it also sits on the LAN to give attackers access to all your other devices, AND it sits on Zigbee to give attackers access to those as well.
- franga2000 5y ago
  No, it can be commanded from the Internet - big difference. It never has a direct connection to the Internet and even that is entirely optional and a hard opt-in (buying more hardware). And if you have attackers on your LAN, you're at the point where controlling your lightbulb is the least of your problems. As for Zigbee, go on, present your alternative - I'm all ears!
  - marcan_42 5y ago
    As far as I know only Apple does the local network stuff. If a device is Alexa or Google Home compatible, it talks directly to some cloud service from the manufacturer on the Internet which then talks to Google or Amazon. So it connects directly to the internet, and moreover there is the additional attack/privacy surface of the manufacturer's cloud service. Source: I run a HomeAssistant local IoT hub and to integrate it with Google Home I had to give it a public hostname and sign up as an IoT vendor with Google to register it as a developer/testing mode service (if I were a real vendor it would be one cloud hub for all my customers, it wouldn't be Google to individual homes, it's just that in my case there is only one user and the server is at my house).
    - franga2000 5y ago
      We're still talking about the light bulbs, aren't we? Bulb --Zigbee--> Zigbee Gateway --WiFi/eth--> LAN. If further integration is desired, an Internet gateway can be used (could be a Google/Apple/Amazon box thing, but could also be a Pi with HomeAssistant!). How that gateway connects to the Internet is up to it - but at no point is either the lightbulb or its LAN gateway in any way connected to the Internet. Therefore, neither the bulb nor the gateway pose a direct security or privacy risk. All the security is offloaded to the gateway and you are entirely free to chose the vendor of your Internet gateway or indeed opt for none at all (and possibly use a VPN if external access is desired)
      - marcan_42 5y ago
        foobar33333 said "The gateway also does not connect to the internet", which cannot be true, because connecting to the internet to speak to a manufacturer-provided cloud service that then speaks to Google is required to integrate with Google Home. That's how it works. The IKEA gateway has to talk to an IKEA cloud service. If you think otherwise, please link to the Google Home docs that explain how that could possibly work, because I can't find them. Here's how you hook up Home Assistant to Google cloud. As you can see, turning it into a cloud service from Google's POV is required. You can either use Home Assistant Cloud (see? cloud service) or set up your own single-user cloud integration (which is what I do), turning your "local" server into a cloud service (with public IP and SSL cert and domain and everything) and registering yourself as an IoT vendor in their developer console, pointing at your "cloud" service URL. https://www.home-assistant.io/integrations/google_assistant/ https://www.home-assistant.io/integrations/google_assistant/ There is no way to keep the entire system local and have the Google Home devices only access it locally, without any cloud infrastructure. The commands flow from Google Home devices, to Google's cloud, to the vendor's cloud, to the vendor's devices. Bulb --> Zigbee --> Zigbee Gateway --> WiFi/eth --> LAN --> Your router --> WAN --> IKEA cloud --> Google cloud --> WAN --> Your router --> LAN --> WiFi --> Google Home device. If that sounds stupid, congrats, this is why they call it the internet of shit.
        franga2000 5y ago
  - jfrunyon 5y ago
    > No, it can be commanded from the Internet - big difference. Big difference from what? You do realize that the vast majority of remotely exploitable security vulnerabilities are in software which can be commanded from the Internet, right?
    - franga2000 5y ago
      Source?? I'm quite certain that it's much harder to exploit something that you can't even send a TCP packet to. If the device is only directly connected to the hub (amazon/google/apple box) and the hub is only connected to the cloud service, how would you even send a payload to the device, even if an exploit existed? You could exploit the cloud service directly and gain control of the device, but that's like stealing the security guard's master keys - you can't call that a vulnerability in the door lock, can you?
      - jfrunyon 5y ago
        Why on earth do you think you can't send a packet to the device? How do you think the cloud service communicates with it?!
- foobar33333 5y ago
  There are 2 layers of relay devices in between. And the only one with direct internet access is a device you already have on the internet and is developed by the top brains and maintained for many years to come unlike your average smart bulb directly hooked to the internet with minimal security. If you buy the dumb remote, you get a useful smart light setup with no internet or even local network connectivity. Its useful because you can turn a room full of lamps on at once or adjust their color.
  - jfrunyon 5y ago
    Oh boy, it sure is impossible to exploit something through a proxy in a training diaper!
- midasuni 5y ago
  You obviously put it on it’s one /30 on the lan and limits it’s connection to what’s needed

jfrunyon 5y ago

> The gateway also does not connect to the internet, it is local network only and can be hooked up to the Apple/Google/Amazon systems for internet access. In other words, it does connect to the internet, it also sits on the LAN to give attackers access to all your other devices, AND it sits on Zigbee to give attackers access to those as well.

franga2000 5y ago
No, it can be commanded from the Internet - big difference. It never has a direct connection to the Internet and even that is entirely optional and a hard opt-in (buying more hardware). And if you have attackers on your LAN, you're at the point where controlling your lightbulb is the least of your problems. As for Zigbee, go on, present your alternative - I'm all ears!
- marcan_42 5y ago
  As far as I know only Apple does the local network stuff. If a device is Alexa or Google Home compatible, it talks directly to some cloud service from the manufacturer on the Internet which then talks to Google or Amazon. So it connects directly to the internet, and moreover there is the additional attack/privacy surface of the manufacturer's cloud service. Source: I run a HomeAssistant local IoT hub and to integrate it with Google Home I had to give it a public hostname and sign up as an IoT vendor with Google to register it as a developer/testing mode service (if I were a real vendor it would be one cloud hub for all my customers, it wouldn't be Google to individual homes, it's just that in my case there is only one user and the server is at my house).
  - franga2000 5y ago
    We're still talking about the light bulbs, aren't we? Bulb --Zigbee--> Zigbee Gateway --WiFi/eth--> LAN. If further integration is desired, an Internet gateway can be used (could be a Google/Apple/Amazon box thing, but could also be a Pi with HomeAssistant!). How that gateway connects to the Internet is up to it - but at no point is either the lightbulb or its LAN gateway in any way connected to the Internet. Therefore, neither the bulb nor the gateway pose a direct security or privacy risk. All the security is offloaded to the gateway and you are entirely free to chose the vendor of your Internet gateway or indeed opt for none at all (and possibly use a VPN if external access is desired)
    - marcan_42 5y ago
      foobar33333 said "The gateway also does not connect to the internet", which cannot be true, because connecting to the internet to speak to a manufacturer-provided cloud service that then speaks to Google is required to integrate with Google Home. That's how it works. The IKEA gateway has to talk to an IKEA cloud service. If you think otherwise, please link to the Google Home docs that explain how that could possibly work, because I can't find them. Here's how you hook up Home Assistant to Google cloud. As you can see, turning it into a cloud service from Google's POV is required. You can either use Home Assistant Cloud (see? cloud service) or set up your own single-user cloud integration (which is what I do), turning your "local" server into a cloud service (with public IP and SSL cert and domain and everything) and registering yourself as an IoT vendor in their developer console, pointing at your "cloud" service URL. https://www.home-assistant.io/integrations/google_assistant/ https://www.home-assistant.io/integrations/google_assistant/ There is no way to keep the entire system local and have the Google Home devices only access it locally, without any cloud infrastructure. The commands flow from Google Home devices, to Google's cloud, to the vendor's cloud, to the vendor's devices. Bulb --> Zigbee --> Zigbee Gateway --> WiFi/eth --> LAN --> Your router --> WAN --> IKEA cloud --> Google cloud --> WAN --> Your router --> LAN --> WiFi --> Google Home device. If that sounds stupid, congrats, this is why they call it the internet of shit.
      - franga2000 5y ago
- jfrunyon 5y ago
  > No, it can be commanded from the Internet - big difference. Big difference from what? You do realize that the vast majority of remotely exploitable security vulnerabilities are in software which can be commanded from the Internet, right?
  - franga2000 5y ago
    Source?? I'm quite certain that it's much harder to exploit something that you can't even send a TCP packet to. If the device is only directly connected to the hub (amazon/google/apple box) and the hub is only connected to the cloud service, how would you even send a payload to the device, even if an exploit existed? You could exploit the cloud service directly and gain control of the device, but that's like stealing the security guard's master keys - you can't call that a vulnerability in the door lock, can you?
    - jfrunyon 5y ago
      Why on earth do you think you can't send a packet to the device? How do you think the cloud service communicates with it?!
foobar33333 5y ago
There are 2 layers of relay devices in between. And the only one with direct internet access is a device you already have on the internet and is developed by the top brains and maintained for many years to come unlike your average smart bulb directly hooked to the internet with minimal security. If you buy the dumb remote, you get a useful smart light setup with no internet or even local network connectivity. Its useful because you can turn a room full of lamps on at once or adjust their color.
- jfrunyon 5y ago
  Oh boy, it sure is impossible to exploit something through a proxy in a training diaper!
midasuni 5y ago
You obviously put it on it’s one /30 on the lan and limits it’s connection to what’s needed