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

Chamberlain blocks smart garage door opener from working with smart homes

arstechnica.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

171–180 of 191 posts

Re: Chamberlain blocks smart garage door opener from working with smart homes

#171

Post by dheera »

rasz wrote: post #170
dheera wrote: post #125

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I just connected my garage door opener to Home Assistant by taking apart the remote and wiring the button to a Zigbee relay. They can't stop me, no part of this is connected to their cloud. In any case, smart home stuff should never rely on the cloud. https://i.imgur.com/lNOXdhe.jpg

Thats cool, how do you monitor status of the door? Open/Closed/Jammed/Overloaded?

Currently I just have a wifi security camera in the garage, but at some point when I'm feeling less lazy I'll install some sort of Zigbee door sensor.

Re: Chamberlain blocks smart garage door opener from working with smart homes

#172

Post by gosub100 »

djhworld wrote: post #6

The home assistant blog post goes into this issue as well https://www.home-assistant.io/blog/2023/11/06/removal-of-myq... If anything it highlights the point that having a cloud service to handle your smart home device is a recipe for shenanigans like this. Stick with ZigBee/Matter devices, and if the device is WiFi try and at least make sure it works over the local network.

There's a workaround for now, but somewhere in a lab engineers are designing a motor with encrypted inputs or a clutch that slams the door unless its signal came from the manufacturer.

Re: Chamberlain blocks smart garage door opener from working with smart homes

#173

Post by elzbardico »

lazide wrote: post #167
elzbardico wrote: post #147

Earlier quoted context omitted.

As the DRM arms race continue, in the next model the button will be a fingerprint reader. To make sure you're not cheating, you can only use the reader in the precise moment an ad you have to watch will tell you so. Of course, even then you will have to watch the ad till completion before the button really does anything.

Haha, silicone case of my finger on the end of the button! taps forehead The arms race continues I guess.

You asked for it. what about a captcha challenge to open your garage? Who is laughing now?

Re: Chamberlain blocks smart garage door opener from working with smart homes

#174

Post by dheera »

elzbardico wrote: post #173
lazide wrote: post #167

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Haha, silicone case of my finger on the end of the button! taps forehead The arms race continues I guess.

You asked for it. what about a captcha challenge to open your garage? Who is laughing now?

I got rid of my Nest camera for this reason. Gave me a Captcha. To view my own damn camera. Who are they gatekeeping? I'll use robots if I want, it's my apartment and my camera.

Re: Chamberlain blocks smart garage door opener from working with smart homes

#175

Post by CamperBob2 »

Kirby64 wrote: post #157
ska wrote: post #137

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> This is only going to get worse. Manual operation seems perfectly understandable in this context. Odds of some AirBnB driving off accidentally with the remote approach 100%.

Honestly, a bigger worry imo is cars that have something like homelink. You can copy a garage door opener, and basically give yourself a garage door opener access whenever you want. I did this accidentally to an old rental house I lived in. When I moved out later I drove by one time and … turns out the homelink still worked. For a criminal, it’d be a very easy way to get back in without any trace.

Not a concern for AirBnB hosts and the like, because once they let the bad guy into their house, it's game over anyway.

However, one thing that is interesting is when you get a loaner car from the dealership, and not only is there a valid Homelink recording, but the nav system still shows the start and end points for the last trip(s) the previous person took. Bonus if their phone's contact list is still there.

Always use the vehicle handover function whenever turning in a rental or loaner car, folks.

Re: Chamberlain blocks smart garage door opener from working with smart homes

#176

Post by CamperBob2 »

elzbardico wrote: post #173
lazide wrote: post #167

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Haha, silicone case of my finger on the end of the button! taps forehead The arms race continues I guess.

You asked for it. what about a captcha challenge to open your garage? Who is laughing now?

OpenAI.

Re: Chamberlain blocks smart garage door opener from working with smart homes

#177

Post by Kirby64 »

dheera wrote: post #165
Kirby64 wrote: post #157

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Honestly, a bigger worry imo is cars that have something like homelink. You can copy a garage door opener, and basically give yourself a garage door opener access whenever you want. I did this accidentally to an old rental house I lived in. When I moved out later I drove by one time and … turns out the homelink still worked. For a criminal, it’d be a very easy way to get back in without any trace.

Yeah but in reality former tenants are statistically unlikely to be criminals -- you probably ran a background check on them prior to them moving in, didn't you? Former tenants could have copied front door keys after all, and probably did for noble reasons like SOs, etc. The garage door remote I modified with the Zigbee relay is a remote I purchased and paired with my rental unit's garage door opener, and then took a…

We’re talking about Airbnb here. I don’t know of any vetting you really do for an Airbnb. And, unlike a key, you can copy a garage door to homelink without do almost any work.

Add to that the fact that garages tend to be less covered from a camera perspective (usually there’s a doorbell camera at the door) and it’s a bit of a blind spot for homeowners I’d think.

Re: Chamberlain blocks smart garage door opener from working with smart homes

#178

Post by matheusmoreira »

elzbardico wrote: post #147
dheera wrote: post #138

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> That's when I found that they actually DRM'ed the button. The usual pair of wires was there, but I couldn't open the door by simply shorting them together. Oof. That's awful, but put a servo above the button that physically hits the button. Analog loopholes are immune to DRM.

As the DRM arms race continue, in the next model the button will be a fingerprint reader. To make sure you're not cheating, you can only use the reader in the precise moment an ad you have to watch will tell you so. Of course, even then you will have to watch the ad till completion before the button really does anything.

It hurts me deep in my soul that I can actually see such a kafkaesque monstruosity become reality.

Re: Chamberlain blocks smart garage door opener from working with smart homes

#179

Post by mike503 »

CamperBob2 wrote: post #132
dheera wrote: post #125

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I just connected my garage door opener to Home Assistant by taking apart the remote and wiring the button to a Zigbee relay. They can't stop me, no part of this is connected to their cloud. In any case, smart home stuff should never rely on the cloud. https://i.imgur.com/lNOXdhe.jpg

Funny you should mention that. I stayed at an AirBnB a while back that I selected precisely because the listing mentioned that a garage was available. It turned out that yes, you could use the garage, but the remote was not provided by the host. So I had to disengage the door and lift it manually, then close it behind me when I left every morning. "Fuck that," I said to myself, as any self-respecting hacker would. "I…

"Doing Woz knows what" is both an awesome phrase and probably factually correct.

Re: Chamberlain blocks smart garage door opener from working with smart homes

#180

Post by Zelizz »

tcbawo wrote: post #118

Knowing someone involved with the Chamberlain technology stack, it sounds like certain users had reverse engineered the API and suddenly caused a DDOS on the Chamberlain cloud with their requests. This is a cloud service with real costs. Chamberlain has a responsibility to maintain access for its users. I can’t speak for Chamberlain, but this reaction seems reasonable.

Sounds like they could implement local network IoT and reduce their server costs to $0 - but then they wouldn't be able to get a continuing revenue stream.
Post reply on HN