Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

Raspberry Pi KVMs Compared: TinyPilot and Pi-KVM v3

jeffgeerling.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

61–70 of 70 posts

Re: Raspberry Pi KVMs Compared: TinyPilot and Pi-KVM v3

#61

Post by nh2 »

louwrentius wrote: post #58
nh2 wrote: post #40

Earlier quoted context omitted.

For some more context why such a device is desirable: Mainboard-built-in KVMs provided by server vendors are usually buggy as hell closed-source horrors, with regular full-compromise holes that make running them over the Internet a complete gamble. This is why open-source KVMs that are just as secure as other normal Linux servers, and auto-upgradable, are very desirable.

My experience with HP iLO with the html5 upgrade is extremely positive, to be frank. Nothing buggy at all.

With buggy I don't mean whether the UI works, but bugs in low-level code that lead to remote code execution and full compromise.

https://www.cvedetails.com/vulnerability-list/vendor_id-10/p...

Re: Raspberry Pi KVMs Compared: TinyPilot and Pi-KVM v3

#63

Post by c_o_n_v_e_x »

Ms-J wrote: post #62

Can this replace something like iDrac? Is there any other open source IP KVM projects out there? It's been on my mind for quite awhile.

Theoretically, there's nothing to stop you from using this instead of iDRAC, iLo, etc.

OpenBMC is an option if you're a manufacturer.

Re: Raspberry Pi KVMs Compared: TinyPilot and Pi-KVM v3

#64

Post by magicalhippo »

atok1 wrote: post #56
mdevaev wrote: post #54

Earlier quoted context omitted.

It's open source, but not open hardware. All the code is completely free, so closed hardware is our way of monetization to continue development.

Would be awesome after you make some money back if you could open hardware it for those of us who require full trust!

What open-hardware Raspberry Pi alternative would you be using with this then?

After all, hardly any point of having a open-hardware HAT if you connect it to a closed-hardware Raspberry Pi. Even if the full schematics etc were available, the processor on the Pi is anything but open.

Re: Raspberry Pi KVMs Compared: TinyPilot and Pi-KVM v3

#65

Post by frozeus »

mdevaev wrote: post #7

PiKVM v3 HAT on Kickstarter right now. https://www.kickstarter.com/projects/mdevaev/pikvm-v3-hat // I'm the author ;)

Did you consider a PCIe card form factor w/ a RPI4 compute module?

I have some cheap rackable server w/o KVM feature and I was ready to order an ASROCK Paul https://www.asrockrack.com/general/productdetail.asp?Model=P... but looks like I will definitely go for a PI KVMs

Re: Raspberry Pi KVMs Compared: TinyPilot and Pi-KVM v3

#66

Post by burnte »

jhgb wrote: post #46
burnte wrote: post #34

Earlier quoted context omitted.

For my design I don't want that, because then we're just making it even more complex. There's a VGA encoder I've been working on, I don't recall the chip ID but I found it in the Lantronix Spiders I have. I've been slowly trying to build a HAT with that that pipes into the Pi for everything else.

How many of these do you expect to manufacture?

If I can keep the cost down, I'm aiming for $100/unit, then I think I could sell quite a few. The nearest competitor, the Lantronix Spider, is $300+ if you can even find them.

Re: Raspberry Pi KVMs Compared: TinyPilot and Pi-KVM v3

#68

Post by mtlynch »

downrightmike wrote: post #67
mtlynch wrote: post #8

TinyPilot founder here. Happy to answer any questions about TinyPilot or KVM over IPs.

mouse clicks KB input rarely works, doesn't seem to work at all after recent updates. Updated it back in July.

I haven't heard of any recent update breaking keyboard input. If you post more details on the help forum, I can help figure out what's going wrong.

https://forum.tinypilotkvm.com/

Re: Raspberry Pi KVMs Compared: TinyPilot and Pi-KVM v3

#70

Post by louwrentius »

nh2 wrote: post #61
louwrentius wrote: post #58

Earlier quoted context omitted.

My experience with HP iLO with the html5 upgrade is extremely positive, to be frank. Nothing buggy at all.

With buggy I don't mean whether the UI works, but bugs in low-level code that lead to remote code execution and full compromise. https://www.cvedetails.com/vulnerability-list/vendor_id-10/p...

Yup, but frankly, those interfaces should be only accessible by trusted systems, if you care about that stuff.
Post reply on HN