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

JetKVM Mini

jetkvm.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

191–200 of 244 posts

Re: JetKVM Mini

#191

Post by rattray »

paulfurtado wrote: post #151
rattray wrote: post #147

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I've never entered a datacenter before – what does that mean / what is it for?

There are really two types of KVMs... classic ones were used by consumers to plug multiple computers into one screen, keyboard, and mouse and flip back and forth between them. Networked KVMs let you remotely access a computer or server. It's like VNC except by physically plugging into the ports. This is useful because it allows you to have remote access to a server when its OS is offline, tweak bios settings, watch i…

Got it! So I could for example plug this into my mac mini at home and reboot it after a power failure or something while traveling?

Re: JetKVM Mini

#192

Post by atdt »

If you have an Intel CPU, there is a good chance you have a KVM built-in (whether you wanted one or not): Intel AMT. Its reputation was tarnished by Intel's dissimulation and opacity about the technology, and a streak of critical vulnerabilities disclosed in late 2017. I chose to take my chances with it anyway for my homelab server. It is secured with a password, mutual TLS (client has to provide a cert), and restricted to the LAN via a physical firewall. It gives me serial console, KVM, and power control.

I like it. It works pretty well. I don't see a reason to trust it any less than closed-hardware, closed-source solutions. I would trust a fully-open-source PIKVM more, however.

The tooling and documentation for setting up Intel AMT via open-source tools is meagre, so I had to roll my own. I only need a small nudge to package it for others to re-use, so reply to this post if you are interested.

Re: JetKVM Mini

#193

Post by thangalin »

Scarbutt wrote: post #166
thangalin wrote: post #163

Tangentially, I tested many KVM models: https://hardwarerecs.stackexchange.com/questions/18561/kvm-d... The only one that met my requirements was the UGREEN 8K@60Hz DisplayPort KVM switch: https://www.amazon.ca/gp/product/B0CFFFHFJT Several months in without any major issues.

You missed the IP part. Which is what makes these product useful to many.

You missed the Tangentially part, which is what tells people that it is a different type of KVM, which are also useful to many.

Re: JetKVM Mini

#194

Post by shepherdjerred »

woadwarrior01 wrote: post #57

On a related note, I came across this USB-C KVM on pre-order the other day. It ostensibly supports Tailscale, which would be really useful. https://sipeed.com/nanokvm-go

I own 3 of these for my homelab. They work really well w/ Tailscale! They sell some PCIE ones, too.

Re: JetKVM Mini

#195

Post by jamespo »

tomasphan wrote: post #132
gregwebs wrote: post #110

This author has tested a lot of IP KVMs and compares them in this post: https://www.jeffgeerling.com/blog/2026/i-tested-every-ip-kvm... He likes JetKVM. However, they appear to be sold out. The Mini seems great but I have yet to receive a preordered item on the advertised timeline. That article pointed to ArkKVM which is a hardware clone of JetKVM but they have now released their own software stack as open source whi…

It’s 3x the cost of jetKVM though. For someone with 8 machines in their home lab this is a big commitment.

Do you really need a KVM on every machine permanently?

Re: JetKVM Mini

#196

Post by gunalx »

doctorhandshake wrote: post #99

I have an OG JetKVM and it works solidly but the thing that prevents me from using it is no video pass through. The awkwardness of an ‘invisible’ monitor connected to windows at all times is hard to live with - windows and apps open there and I’m constantly having to pull them back to an another monitor. My next KVM will be pass through for this reason, but the consumer ones seem to top out at 4k30, which is not grea…

Look at the nanokvm pro. 4k@45 with pass through.

Re: JetKVM Mini

#197

Post by Silly3850 »

atdt wrote: post #192

If you have an Intel CPU, there is a good chance you have a KVM built-in (whether you wanted one or not): Intel AMT. Its reputation was tarnished by Intel's dissimulation and opacity about the technology, and a streak of critical vulnerabilities disclosed in late 2017. I chose to take my chances with it anyway for my homelab server. It is secured with a password, mutual TLS (client has to provide a cert), and restric…

I'm interested, even if you don't have time to package it nicely, I would still appreciate sharing the src

Re: JetKVM Mini

#199

Post by Scramblejams »

atdt wrote: post #192

If you have an Intel CPU, there is a good chance you have a KVM built-in (whether you wanted one or not): Intel AMT. Its reputation was tarnished by Intel's dissimulation and opacity about the technology, and a streak of critical vulnerabilities disclosed in late 2017. I chose to take my chances with it anyway for my homelab server. It is secured with a password, mutual TLS (client has to provide a cert), and restric…

I'm interested.

Re: JetKVM Mini

#200

Post by yzmtf2008 »

atdt wrote: post #192

If you have an Intel CPU, there is a good chance you have a KVM built-in (whether you wanted one or not): Intel AMT. Its reputation was tarnished by Intel's dissimulation and opacity about the technology, and a streak of critical vulnerabilities disclosed in late 2017. I chose to take my chances with it anyway for my homelab server. It is secured with a password, mutual TLS (client has to provide a cert), and restric…

This would require a vPro CPU and compatible motherboard, right?
Post reply on HN