Shameless plug to a 100% OSS IoT / home automation system I contribute to that agrees. Everything IoT should be fully open source and not rely on cloud connections:
https://home-assistant.io/blog/2016/04/05/your-hub-should-be...
More awful IoT stuff
161–170 of 245 posts
Re: More awful IoT stuff
#162Sorry, but what does he mean by "infringing on my copyright"? Is he the author of one of the libraries it uses?
Yes. He is a major contributor to the Linux kernel, and unless I remember incorrectly, he was almost single handedly responsible for getting UEFI support in Linux.
Re: More awful IoT stuff
#163Earlier quoted context omitted.
I don't consider Chromecast as being part of IoT. Chromecast is mostly used as an internet media device, whereas I usually interpret IoT as slapping Internet capabilities on traditional appliances (light bulbs, fridges, whatever). Curious what other people think.
Chromecast is slapping Internet capabilities on a traditional appliance (TV).
Only in as much as it lets you access content streams on the Internet. It doesn't let you control your TV via the cloud or anything. In terms of functionality I think it's pretty comparable to any other content stream you can hook up to your TV, going back to Ataris and VCRs.
Re: More awful IoT stuff
#164@internetofshit is a great follow and pretty quickly illustrates just how absurd the IoT rush has become. Solutions in search of problems.
I have the same view, but there are all these companies investing billions into it, so there's something I don't see?
It's like this is being rammed down everyone's throats. IoT is heralded as "the next big thing" and nobody want to miss out on it. Which means everybody is investing and developing it, which means it will probably become a reality. A self-fulfilling prophecy of sorts, which is kind of sad because IMO it's not a particularly compelling vision. There are thousands of things we could improve rather than placing chips with sensors everywhere.
Re: More awful IoT stuff
#165@internetofshit is a great follow and pretty quickly illustrates just how absurd the IoT rush has become. Solutions in search of problems.
I have the same view, but there are all these companies investing billions into it, so there's something I don't see? It's like this is being rammed down everyone's throats. IoT is heralded as "the next big thing" and nobody want to miss out on it. Which means everybody is investing and developing it, which means it will probably become a reality. A self-fulfilling prophecy of sorts, which is kind of sad because IMO…
Chips with sensors everywhere is inevitable; both are cheap and getting cheaper.
The real question in my mind is whether the devices will be using proprietary protocols to communicate with centralized corporate cloud servers, or some kind of open, interoperable mesh network. Right now I don't like the way the trend is going.
Re: More awful IoT stuff
#166Alright so this is mostly OT, but I figured people who are into IoT might be able to help; does anyone know of a setup that would easily let me control a remote AC outlet by plugging a sensor into an existing hard-switched AC outlet? I'd rather not deal with installing a hub and programming scenes etc. Thanks!
Re: More awful IoT stuff
#167I just blogged about this yesterday. In short: > The line in the sand for me is: network vs cloud-based systems. I want things to be network connected, but I want it for my own network only. I want to be able to control my coffee pot, but only from home. If I choose to expose this over the internet, great! It's up to me to make sure it's secure. I don't want anyone making that decision for me. I also want it to be up…
I'd argue that these guys are actually supplying. Just firewall it out to a specific network segment for these devices, have one box that interacts with it and modify it to your own liking, you have root on it afterall.
They're dirt cheap, they work, and you get root so it's completely upgradable and hackable.
Can't beat that really if you have decent security practices outside of the device.
It's definitely an investment in terms of time to beat it into shape, but it sounds like a fun weekend project to me.
Re: More awful IoT stuff
#168I just blogged about this yesterday. In short: > The line in the sand for me is: network vs cloud-based systems. I want things to be network connected, but I want it for my own network only. I want to be able to control my coffee pot, but only from home. If I choose to expose this over the internet, great! It's up to me to make sure it's secure. I don't want anyone making that decision for me. I also want it to be up…
It's absurd that an IoT device contacts a server hundreds of miles away when I'm inside my house turning on my lights via wifi.
Apparently this is kind of a hard thing to handle. I battle with this and PS4 Remote Play -- about 80% of the time, RP will give up looking on my local network and go out to the internet to find my PS4... which is right here on the same network. If I cancel it and retry a few times it always ends up seeing it but man what a pain.
Re: More awful IoT stuff
#169Earlier quoted context omitted.
Come on, the last thing he reviewed sent everything in plaintext, had no root password, called out to multiple chinese servers, ran ssh via a hardcoded password that was something like a simple word, and didn't have any way of actually updating the code on the device. Oh, and it barely even functioned as a lightbulb... This is lightyears better than that, and yeah they fucked up a bunch of stuff, but it at least show…
Agreed. It may not be technically good, but it's as good as the door locks that hundreds of millions of people rely on to protect their homes every day. Most home doors/deadbolts are easily pickable with a few weeks' practice. It keeps honest people honest.
I somewhat agree. Since it's only a plug, if the worst that a hacker can do is turn your plug on and off, it's not the end of the world.
But if there is a vulnerability that lets someone use this plug to pivot an attack on the rest of your machines in your network, now it's a big fuckin deal.
Re: More awful IoT stuff
#170Earlier quoted context omitted.
I'd love a list like that as well, but sadly I don't think one exists and I don't think there's any money in doing it. Nobody wants to hear about good IoT devices, they want to make fun of bad ones and feel superior, that's what sells clicks. Maybe i'm just being cynical...
I think you nailed it: hackers don't want to write blog posts saying "damn, this thing was pretty well made". Perhaps an open-source effort to document & track what work has been done, even if it's just pulling firmware images and taking a look around. Maybe some kind of gamification to motivate researchers to pull things apart and report what they see.
It's not just that people don't want to write about it, it's that people don't want to read it either.
You'd never see a post on the front page of HN about how IoT device X was well designed and is generally secure, but you see (and will continue to see) them top out about how awful they are.
Just look at this thread. Half the answers to "what are some good IoT devices" is "lol there aren't any"... The HN crowd doesn't want good IoT devices, they want to make fun of bad ones.