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

Home Assistant blocked from integrating with Garage Door opener API

home-assistant.io

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

211–220 of 655 posts

Re: Home Assistant blocked from integrating with Garage Door opener API

#211

Post by lvh »

jpitz wrote: post #176
lvh wrote: post #132

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Sort-of: the newer ones require the physical button to speak the same rolling code protocol the remotes do. So, yes: but you have to modify a real door opener. ratgdo has the advantage that it pretends to be said door opener.

There's often a pair of pins on the internal board that you can attach a relay to. Shorting the pins causes the door to close.

That sounds even dicier than modifying the wall switch, but sure :)

There is a part of me that wants to break the damn thing open to hunt for a 3.3V line so I can power the ratgdo without a USB PSU...

Re: Home Assistant blocked from integrating with Garage Door opener API

#212

Post by lvh »

WirelessGigabit wrote: post #129

The reason they caused that much traffic is because Home-Assistant has no other way of finding out the status. If only there was a LOCAL way. But I can't poll the device locally. I can't send it commands.

Good news: you can now, I just installed it and it was easy and fun. https://github.com/PaulWieland/ratgdo

But it is external to the device, you're right :) And for some crazy reason this guy is getting a lot of orders recently ;)

Re: Home Assistant blocked from integrating with Garage Door opener API

#213

Post by codezero »

I’m recently in the market for a garage door opener I can automate (specifically close automatically after X time open) - does anyone have recommendations or is ratgdo the way to go?

Also I understand one of the reasons this isn’t a standard offering is because garage openers have a hard time not crushing things? Kind of surprised me.

Re: Home Assistant blocked from integrating with Garage Door opener API

#214

Post by sokoloff »

joelfried wrote: post #181
sokoloff wrote: post #101

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I agree with that conclusion. I think we'd also need to figure out some durable and stable way to reach a conclusion on "when should the software be published out of escrow?" that handles a bunch of the various edge cases. "What happens to devices that are one-time programmable? What devices are in-scope/out-of-scope? Does this apply to radio firmware as well as general CPU firmware? Is the software license changed a…

I agree as well, though I don't think we need to figure out all edge cases before the legislation is viable. All we need to do is allow any person who purchased said software a private cause of action in which they can petition a court to release the code. Then a judge could decide based on the merits of the person's need whether the code should be released or not.

I think that situation exists now, which is the essential root of the problem.

It's too expensive and too unlikely to succeed, but I could sue Chamberlain now arguing that they have breached an implied contract and that the remedy I seek is for them to open-source their code.

Re: Home Assistant blocked from integrating with Garage Door opener API

#215

Post by mattgreenrocks »

It's hard to emphasize how different the mindset of the late 2000s Internet is to nowadays.

APIs were more readily available and open. Mashups were usually encouraged, so long as you didn't generate undue stress.

Nowadays its a million tiny business silos hoarding tediously-obscure-but-still-sometimes-useful data. And you have to prove that what you want to do with the API doesn't infringe on their ability to capitalize on it better.

The irony is that all the data is way more easily accessible from a technical POV now due to the prevalence of SPAs and REST, but the legal environment is significantly more dangerous.

Re: Home Assistant blocked from integrating with Garage Door opener API

#216

Post by fullstop »

ttcbj wrote: post #142
bitshiftfaced wrote: post #122

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I think they want you to install their app so that you have to open the app everytime you press the button. From there, you see ads to other products.

I use the myq app to open my garage door open regularly. The app is slow to open and generally annoying. For example, the whole interface is initially blocked, so you tap to open and it doesn't register the tap, still doesn't register the tap, then finally it does. I was not aware of there being ads in it, but I just looked, and you are absolutely right, there is an ad at the top. It looks like its for their home sec…

> I use the myq app to open my garage door open regularly.

It used to ask me to provide a rating every time I opened the app. I eventually added a negative rating because it kept asking even after I had answered "Do not ask me".

Re: Home Assistant blocked from integrating with Garage Door opener API

#217

Post by cameldrv »

epiecs wrote: post #156
lhamil64 wrote: post #152

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Or open up a local API so Home Assistant users don't even need to hit their servers in the first place, which is preferable anyway...

I was just going to comment this. The device is network connected anyhow. So just open up the local api.

Haha this is the company that has an undocumented encrypted wire protocol between the wired button and the opener so you have to use their button instead of a normal doorbell switch.

Re: Home Assistant blocked from integrating with Garage Door opener API

#218

Post by ziml77 »

thecapybara wrote: post #180
lhamil64 wrote: post #152

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Or open up a local API so Home Assistant users don't even need to hit their servers in the first place, which is preferable anyway...

If I recall correctly, Chamberlin had an optional accessory that added HomeKit support to garage door openers, and that was discontinued last year. Home Assistant is capable of acting as a HomeKit hub, allowing it to control HomeKit compatible devices locally that otherwise would've required a cloud connection.

I'm so glad HomeKit exists because without it I'm positive the vast majority of "smart" home devices wouldn't support any kind of local connectivity.

Re: Home Assistant blocked from integrating with Garage Door opener API

#219

Post by throw03172019 »

quadrifoliate wrote: post #134
HunterWare wrote: post #22

I use Home Assistant and have this openner. My installer recommeneded it because he’s had happy customers like me who use home automation. I can tell you that I a) will never recommend or buy the brand again, and b) have already complained to my installer about his recommendation of this line (and he is moving to another brand). I wish ratgdo a ton of success and have several on order.

> have already complained to my installer about his recommendation of this line (and he is moving to another brand). What brand is he moving to? Does it work with Home Assistant? I can't recall the last time I saw a garage door that wasn't Chamberlain or one of the brands they own. At least in my area they seem to have a near-monopoly.

Hopefully it has a native HomeKit integration.

Re: Home Assistant blocked from integrating with Garage Door opener API

#220

Post by lloeki »

colinmorelli wrote: post #168
epiecs wrote: post #158

Earlier quoted context omitted.

They can just pay for home assistant cloud?

1) Home Assistant is not an officially sanctioned option by the devices and will run into technical issues regardless whether it's cloud hosted or not (as seen by the very post we're all commenting on). 2) Even if the above were not true, at that point you're back to an internet enabled smart home device system, and now we're simply picking which vendor to trust over the other. But in both cases, the option for the v…

> Even if the above were not true, at that point you're back to an internet enabled smart home device system

Home Assistant Cloud is essentially a TCP-level proxy (IOW Nabu Casa sees jack squat):

> The remote UI encrypts all communication between your browser and your local instance. Encryption is provided by a Let’s Encrypt certificate. Under the hood, your local Home Assistant instance is connected to one of our custom built UI proxy servers. Our UI proxy servers operate at the TCP level and will forward all encrypted data to the local instance.

> Routing is made possible by the Server Name Indication (SNI) extension on the TLS handshake. It contains the information for which hostname an incoming request is destined, and we forward this information to the matching local instance. To be able to route multiple simultaneous requests, all data will be routed via a TCP multiplexer. The local Home Assistant instance will receive the TCP packets, demultiplex them, decrypt them with the SSL certificate and forward them to the HTTP component.

> The source code is available on GitHub:

> SniTun - End-to-End encryption with SNI proxy on top of a TCP multiplexer

> hass-nabucasa - Cloud integration in Home Assistant

https://www.nabucasa.com/config/remote/#how-it-works

https://www.nabucasa.com/config/remote/#security

Post reply on HN