3 ms·
This would be out of the frying pan and into the fire. The only long term viable approach for IoT security is to not allow these devices on the Internet in the
by fidotron 1y ago
This would be out of the frying pan and into the fire.
The only long term viable approach for IoT security is to not allow these devices on the Internet in the first place. Have the WiFi Access Point, or some other gateway, act as the broker for all information, and the default is each device sees nothing until given permission. *
Whenever this comes up people raise the point that this won't work because it disincentivizes making devices to slurp data, but it's not like that ecosystem actually exists at all, with the exception of smart TV which hardly counts as IoT. Consumer IoT hasn't taken off because consumers are rightly paranoid about bait-and-switch and being left with useless devices in the walls of their homes.
* This is roughly what https://github.com/atomirex/umbrella https://github.com/atomirex/umbrella is trying to head towards, hence seeing if a $50 AP can act as a media SFU, and learning it totally can.
- jamesgeck0 1y agoApple had a decent start on this. An always-on Apple TV can connect to a Zigbee hub and provide remote access to devices through HomeKit. But it seems like Zigbee isn't winning out as the dominant standard. Most of the recent HomeKit improvements have been related to the wifi-based Matter.
- fidotron 1y agoIndustrially there is a decent amount of LoRa (and relatedly lorawan) about too, and that fills a similar role to Zigbee in the comparison.
- CalRobert 1y agoIt's definitely an issue - I was at a heat pump company working on data, and as much as the work was interesting (and I liked doing something related to sustainability), there was a core question of "wait, _why_ do we need to gather data from everyone's thermostats again?" Though as we move towards things like virtual power plants and more integrated systems with home batteries, etc. the use case is clearer.
- rightbyte 1y ago> The only long term viable approach for IoT security is to not allow these devices on the Internet in the first place. Ye it is about that simple. IoT don't need the I. Given how low my trust is for vendors I wouldn't even be happy with a separate no internet wifi since the devices can hook up to some other wifi.
- fidotron 1y agoExactly. The wifi these devices should be on should have no access to anything except the broker in the gateway device. Certainly no multicast or anything like that.
- heraldgeezer 1y ago>Have the WiFi Access Point, or some other gateway, act as the broker for all information, and the default is each device sees nothing until given permission. * Not everywhere is going to have WiFi. A SIM can use a private APN that selects the PGW/IP/Network range and from the ISP usually has a VPN to your network. Does not go "over the internet" at all. This is (usually) how industrial IoT, connected cars etc work. Shipping containers cant rely on WiFi.