Microsoft, Intel, Samsung, Other Tech Companies Form New IoT Alliance (techtimes.com)

The Internet of Things (IoT) is the next step toward technological advancement but it requires a huge effort on manufacturers' and developers' part to make different devices and operating systems to function seamlessly with one another. Now, many of the big names in the industry are banding together to form the Open Connectivity Foundation or OCF to set standards for IoT devices. The lineup includes ARRIS, CableLabs, Cisco, Electrolux, GE Digital, Intel, Microsoft, Qualcomm, and Samsung, which will all work closely with one another to set rules and specifications to guarantee a singular advancement in the field.

Comments

Guaranteed to fail

[Anonymous Coward]

This will be as successful as the HDMI-CEC design.

Important question

[Anonymous Coward]

Does this consortium plan to set standards for security? I'm not convinced that the biggest issue facing IoT is interoperability but rather the security (or lack of it) in many devices. Many of the ideas are very cool, but unless they're secured, IoT devices are backdoors into otherwise secure networks. I'm hoping that the result is an industry standard for IoT security.

Re:Important question

[U2xhc2hkb3QgU3Vja3M]

Microsoft is involved so you can be sure that (lack of) security will be implemented.

Re:Important question

[mrchaotica]

We can be sure as Hell they aren't about to implement any actual security -- that is, the security of allowing the devices to be controlled by the owner's server rather than some bullshit third-party "cloud" service, so that the owner's data isn't spewed everywhere and passed around like a cheap whore.

Re: Important question

[Anonymous Coward]

127.0.0.1
Bring it on.

Re:Important question

[WaffleMonster]

Does this consortium plan to set standards for security?

Sure like they did for UPnP.

I'm not convinced that the biggest issue facing IoT is interoperability but rather the security (or lack of it) in many devices.

My guess the biggest issue facing IoT is lack of a compelling value proposition.

Telling even with over the top cheerleading of TFA "The Internet of Things (IoT) is definitely the next step toward technological advancement" they chose to mention an Internet connected fridge and "smart shoes".

Many of the ideas are very cool, but unless they're secured, IoT devices are backdoors into otherwise secure networks

That's a tall order given the business case for IoT in consumer space is exfiltration of private information, government sponsored snooping and ads.

I'm hoping that the result is an industry standard for IoT security.

The industry standard for IoT is the front page of the New York times.

Re:Important question

[davester666]

Security and encryption will be integrated as part of v3 of the hardware release.

Re:Important question

[Gavagai80]

Telling even with over the top cheerleading of TFA "The Internet of Things (IoT) is definitely the next step toward technological advancement" they chose to mention an Internet connected fridge and "smart shoes".

Smart shoes are likely to thrive as a niche. Runners already pay hundreds of dollars for shoes and can see obvious conveniences to smart shoes, so why not?Most of us will never be wearing smart shoes, but that doesn't mean it won't be a billion dollar industry.

Re:Important question

[scdeimos]

Does this consortium plan to set standards for security?

Sure like they did for UPnP.

Which is also on the OCF web site, UPnP Specifications

Re: Important question

[houghi]

Try http://hackme.houghi.org/ Bonus points if you are able to delete partitions.

Re:Important question

[mrchaotica]

Imagine a world where the only clothes sold were spike heels and leopard-print mini-skirts -- meaning even you were forced to either wear whore clothes or go naked. Would you like to live in such a world?

Me neither. Similarly, the mere existence of these trojaned mal-devices is harmful regardless of whether stupid people "deserve" them or not!

Re: Important question

[Anonymous Coward]

Done! I've destroyed all your f

Re:Important question

[sjames]

>p>They don't want them to be secure. Secure devices wouldn't phone home and make themselves dependent on the continuing good will of whoever owns the server out there that they have been made to depend on to even provide dumb functionality.

IoT could be a decent thing if it spoke a clean and really open protocol and communicated with a server on the LAN using a properly authenticated protocol.

Re:Important question

[AmiMoJo]

Sure like they did for UPnP.

Come on, that's just cynical. WPS is almost secure! And it only took them three attempts to get wifi security sort of right!

The real problem is the users. To be honest, I'm kinda guilty of this too... I bought a TV and couldn't get it to turn on. Fired off a quick email to the shop... Then RTFM and found the physical power button. In my defence it was quite well hidden.

When you are talking millions of units, you can guarantee that there will be thousands and thousands of "hurrr durrr how do i wifi??!1" calls to your tech support line. Then some "nerd" will go online, pretending to be an expert, and write a shitty Amazon review because he couldn't find the power switch, and now your product has a reputation for being hard to use.

Re:Important question

[Grishnakh]

Imagine a world where the only clothes sold were spike heels and leopard-print mini-skirts -- meaning even you were forced to either wear whore clothes or go naked. Would you like to live in such a world?

Sure, why not? It's really not that hard to make your own clothes. Similarly, it's not that hard to download Linux and use it.

If people are such sheep that they will only use/buy what's made available to them by a few giant corporations, and are unwilling to take their lives into their own hands, then yes, they do deserve whatever happens to them. The whole reason most of us have phones running the Linux kernel is because a bunch of people decided they weren't going to just accept whatever crap a few big corporations deigned to sell them.

Re:Important question

[Grishnakh]

To be fair, TVs are supposed to be designed for the average moron to use. If you had trouble finding the power switch, then that TV was probably a very bad design, and deserves bad reviews and a reputation for being hard to use. Turning on a TV should be a no-brainer, and if it isn't, the designer failed.

Re:Important question

[Grishnakh]

As a paying customer, I demand to always have an easy and natural way to disable all remote control and telemetry, and to easily tell that it's disabled.

Haha, good luck with that. You might as well demand all the source code too.

Asimov's laws apply only to robots, but the doctrine I am demanding will eventually apply to everything. (Even computer operating systems, where the wide-spread abuse has already begun, thanks to Windows 10.)

This proves my point. Windows 10 is blatantly spying on its users, forcing "upgrades" on them, preventing them from disabling the spying, etc., yet people are all happily using it anyway (and where they aren't happily using it, they're using it out of resignation). No one is actually abandoning the Windows platform because of these blatant abuses.

Since consumers will obviously buy whatever they're told to buy, and only a few malcontents will protest it (and their numbers are just too small to make a difference), why would any IoT companies bother to listen to your demands with regard to control and telemetry?

Re:Important question

[mrchaotica]

Sure, why not? It's really not that hard to make your own clothes. Similarly, it's not that hard to download Linux and use it.

We're not talking about software, we're talking about hardware. In particular, Linux doesn't help when the entire industry is making products that are uniformly Tivo-ized.

Let me put it this way: show me a thermostat that I can buy at Home Depot or Lowes that I can control over a network without going through a third-party cloud service -- either out-of-the-box or by reflashing with firmware that's no less well-supported than OpenWRT -- and I'll concede your point.

Re:Important question

[WaffleMonster]

They said that about mobile phones.

And personal computers.

Granted that was when the phones were small suitcases or built into a car and cost a few dollars a minute to talk via satellite.

"They said that about x" is an example of an unfalsifiable statement. This occurs when no reasonable 'x' exists for which the underlying assertion can be evaluated as false. (e.g. x = "motorized abacus" or x = "dry icecream")

Unfalsifiable statements convey no useful information.

Re:Important question

[Grishnakh]

You're screwing up the analogy. I didn't say anything about modifying some spike heels and miniskirts, I said you should your own clothes. Similarly here, instead of trying to take someone else's hardware and modify it, you need to make your own hardware. With Arduino and friends, it's really not that hard anymore. A thermostat? Are you kidding? Do you have any idea how simple a thermostat is to build? You just need a microcontroller, a temperature sensor, and a relay or two. With an Arduino, you could even make a nice LCD screen and fancy-looking UI for it out of some off-the-shelf components. And you can slap on a WiFi module too.

Re:Important question

[spellicer]

Not really weighing in on the making clothes analogy, but if you wanted a thermostat to control without the cloud. The Vera Lite controller can work independent of the Internet.
http://getvera.com/controllers...

While their site provides conveniences like easier connectivity without port forwarding, the entire setup can be done without any connectivity to their site. Then couple that with Z-Wave devices like this Honeywell Z-Wave Thermostat I looked up (I haven't used it, but have a Trane Z-Wave thermostat and a 2GIG Z-Wave Thermostat):
http://www.homedepot.com/p/Hon...

Personally, I've been writing my own node.js based z-wave controller using a Z-Wave USB stick plugged into a Raspberry Pi. But that's only by choice. I ran the Vera Lite for a couple years and it worked fine. Admitted, this is a 2 part solution, but the Vera Lite would be your Z-Wave controller for other devices such as light switches and such. For something you can buy at Lowe's or Home Depot:
http://www.lowes.com/pd_650029...

Re:Important question

[mrchaotica]

Thanks for the info. Do you know of anything that connects via Ethernet instead of wireless?

They all need a COM interface

[JohnStock]

Then everyone can use them everywhere. Honest.

Names to stay away from.

[Anonymous Coward]

>Microsoft

>Intel

If i want a bunch of intimate devices forwarding everything I do to third parties,, and having backdoors I now know who to buy from.

Re:Names to stay away from.

[jrumney]

Having your intimate devices exposed where they can be controlled by people who do not know your safe word, is probably not such a great idea.

Re:Names to stay away from.

[unixisc]

I wouldn't bunch Intel in w/ Microsoft. What specific initiatives of theirs can you identify which undermines your privacy, like Microsoft's Telemetry does?

Re:Apple is not present

[Anonymous Coward]

Look at the list and you can see that they are working together because NONE of them are doing well with (the new stupid catch phrase) IoT.

The companies that are doing well on their own are probably not interested at all in helping the competition.

Backdoor Alliance

[zenlessyank]

Gotta make sure those backdoors have compatible interoperability.

Failed start

[LostMyBeaver]

For Cisco, they already use an IoT standard.. it works great... it's also as easy to implement as H.323 and as well documented as ONCRPC.

Give dollars, get paper.

[wheelium]

For only a nominal fee of $1,000 dollars, you too can become OCF certified! http://openconnectivity.org/jo...

Re:Give dollars, get paper.

[thegarbz]

Are you trying to be funny because you think this is expensive or because you realise this is quite cheap compared to any other certification out there?

Re:Give dollars, get paper.

[sjames]

$1000 is a lot of money for a meaningless bit of paper.

Power grab by the big boys

[Dracos]

This is a power grab by established giants to prevent an emerging market from getting away from their control. There are no actual IoT entities here: Raspberry Pi Foundation, Arduino LLC, etc. Not even ARM Holdings, whose chips designs will be in most IoT devices. Just the overrepresentation of Cable related companies makes it suspicious.

Re:Power grab by the big boys

[Dahamma]

Samsung is a valid player, IMO (since they bought SmartThings). The rest of them are a really motley crew desperately trying to figure out a way to get their chips or OS into as-of-yet uninvented IoT devices, or get their networks to work with said uninvented devices.

But there is no power grab here, since no power WAS grabbed. Unless Google, Apple, or Amazon pays any attention to them it will be mostly irrelevant.

Re:Power grab by the big boys

[thegarbz]

Errr "IoT entities"? What do any of the above manufacture that makes them IoT entities?
Raspberry Pi : a small computer with ethernet and no features to justify it's IoT name, not even it's size.
Arduino LLC: An out of the box microcontroller development board which comes with no software at all (kind of the important part of IoT)
ARM Holdings: Microcontroller manufacturer who has no hardware IoT devices.

See, not a thing. The closest any of the above come to being IoT is that they enable tinkerers to build their own IoT devices. But given IoT is all about software and interfacing options they do a heck of a crap job at that. Arduino actually has the biggest portfolio there, but that has little to do with the company and everything to do with with the shield concept many of which aren't even developed by them but rather just sold open community designs (Is Allied Express an IoT firm now too?). Now let's compare that to the list of companies involved:

ARRIS - Company deploying IoT wireless devices and providing IoT services
CableLabs - Company deploying IoT wireless devices
Cisco - Company manufacturing IoT wireless gateways and multi-protocol gateways used in IoT devices.
Electrolux - Company that has been experimenting with putting IoT crap in all their products since before it was called IoT
GE Digital - Company that has been experimenting with putting IoT crap in all their products since before it was called IoT
Intel - Company which may sound like ARM or Arduino above, but actually invests actual R&D money into IoT.
Microsoft - Company with an active IoT platform, active IoT products, and active IoT related partnerships with many vendors on the market.
Qualcomm - Company producing all-in-one IoT SOCs. These guys are far more relevant in the sector than ARM will ever be.
Samsung - Company that has been experimenting with putting IoT crap in all their products since before it was called IoT

Actually if I were to question some notable omissions I would be looking at:

Philips - IoT device manufacturer which has been caught out for breaking interoperability.
Google - Nest / Brillo platforms
Apple - Homekit platform
Zigbee Alliance - IoT network and retrofit product provider back before IoT was a thing.

Re:Power grab by the big boys

[Darinbob]

You need wireless experts in any IoT group, entities doing Wi-Sun, 802.15.4, things like that. I don't see any of the named companies doing any of that.

Re:Power grab by the big boys

[drinkypoo]

Raspberry Pi : a small computer with ethernet and no features to justify it's IoT name, not even it's size.

Pi Zero is small enough to do most IoT jobs, but there are actually lots of larger IoT jobs where there's lots of room for something like Pi, like major appliances.

Arduino LLC: An out of the box microcontroller development board which comes with no software at all (kind of the important part of IoT)

Sigh. What it comes with doesn't matter if you can trivially download what you need. The libraries for the communications hardware available provide for their function. On the other hand, much of that hardware is a microcontroller in its own right, like say ESP8266 which is commonly used simply as a WiFi adapter for Arduino. Unless you need all the I/O of the Arduino, it's better just to use the ESP.

ARM Holdings: Microcontroller manufacturer who has no hardware IoT devices.

If R-Pi isn't IoT, nor is Intel. But they both are. ARM is relevant because their cores will be used far and wide, and maybe they should be involved in talks on security.

Re:Power grab by the big boys

[phantomfive]

Here's the way standards have worked in the industry for decades, for longer than I've been alive:

One company gets an advantage.
The losing companies get together and make a standard, which (they hope) gives them a chance to catch up to the leader.

This isn't necessarily a bad thing, it's a free-market motivation towards standardization. In this case though, it seems like a cabal of hopeless losers (at least in this industry), and it'll take more than a standard to help them catch up.

Re:Power grab by the big boys

[thegarbz]

Pi Zero [raspberrypi.org] is small enough to do most IoT jobs, but there are actually lots of larger IoT jobs where there's lots of room for something like Pi, like major appliances.

It's still just a development board, it's a computer, a non-profit product, a hobby device. Don't get me wrong I have 5 of them at home, but you won't find me sticking them in any IoT device. Companies don't like other people dictating form factor, companies don't like spending money on designs when they can simply roll it all in one, and companies definitely don't base products on boards which have incredible supply issues. They are not an IoT player in the market any more than my home built PC is.

Sigh. What it comes with doesn't matter if you can trivially download what you need.

So what you're saying is there some other group who are maintaining a library for interconnection? I have the perfect alliance they could join.

If R-Pi isn't IoT, nor is Intel. But they both are. ARM is relevant because their cores will be used far and wide, and maybe they should be involved in talks on security.

- The R-Pi foundation makes one product set, a small computer.
- ARM make a microcontroller core. They can be replaced by any vendor. Nothing in their hardware makes them IoT. Integrators like Qualcomm provide the additional bolt on hardware. Security on the hardware level is hardly an issue. Actually it's an anti-issue. Security on hardware typically means locking out users, let the software vendors and integrators discuss the security.
- Intel provide processors. Oh wait... we've already said that's got nothing to do with IoT. Intel provide wireless technology, gateway products, they license technologies for sensing, data transmission, and security, they provide development platforms, cloud database platforms, network platforms, they offer consulting services, and integration services for vendors.

Re:Power grab by the big boys

[Dutch Gun]

Yep, Samsung has entertained the world with their concept "smart fridge" each year for the past few years, with wireless connectivity, built-in cameras and LCD displays. We laugh now, but probably in the near future they'll be built into nearly ALL new fridges, just like they're built into nearly all new TVs these days. Just give it time, I suppose. Fortunately, keeping devices OFF the network is still easy - just don't give them the WPA key. At the very least, you probably need to make sure those stupid things are on an isolated network that can't interact with your main network. Samsung and most other hardware manufacturers have demonstrated themselves to be woefully inept when it comes to security and privacy issues time and time again.

Honestly, even though I don't own many Apple devices (just one mac mini for development purposes), Apple is probably one of the few companies I'd trust to get the security AND privacy issues right. They've got the technical chops for the security thanks to iOS-related experience, and because they'd charge enough for the devices themselves, they probably wouldn't feel the need to siphon up our personal data for advertising revenue. I'm much more comfortable with a business model that makes money just selling hardware at a decent markup. So many other business models quickly turn slimy and privacy-invading.

Re:Power grab by the big boys

[slashping]

The only bad part is that the resulting standard is usually an overly complex monstrosity, with every part completely reinvented instead of based on existing protocols.

Re:Power grab by the big boys

[phantomfive]

That's definitely what happened with OSI.

Re:Power grab by the big boys

[thegarbz]

Depends on the focus of the group. I don't see anything there which screams that people will be discussing the type of IoT link. Not all IoT is wireless.

What you do need is vendors that implement SoCs, provide gateway devices, provide analytics and database servers, software vendors, IDE vendors, and vendors for final products. You have those in that list above.

Re:Power grab by the big boys

[AmiMoJo]

The big players are mobile networks and infrastructure companies like Violia. They have been building IoT networks for a few years. Sigfox, LoRa and a number of others.

Re:Power grab by the big boys

[CanadianMacFan]

Until your neighbour opens up a guest WiFi network without a password and then you have to be careful with what you say in front of your Samsung TV and fridge.

Re:Power grab by the big boys

[castionsosa]

Apple's model is at least honest. You pay for the hardware, and you also know that when OS support is pulled, you will wind up paying for hardware in a few years... but that is a lot better than finding any and every way to sell your data to third parties.

I have never understood the purpose of a "smart fridge". Does it help keep things cold better than a plain fridge? No. Does it provide a high temperature alarm? No. For the price of one of those overpriced units with fail-prone gewgaws, I can buy myself a fridge that runs on electric, but switches to natural gas or propane, and has an overtemp alarm. To boot, the only electricity the fridge needs if running on gas is the current to power the light bulb when the door is open.

I can see what -can- come with a smart fridge. Not just monitoring, with the data constantly sold, but having fridge doors lock until interactive ads are completed by the user, the fridge not allowing the door to open unless "authorized" food is stored (stuff packaged with encrypted RFID tags), and so on. Of course, there are the hacking implications. Turn a freezer off, let stuff get nice and full of botulism, turn freezer back on, the owners of the fridge would never be the wiser until they ate the food inside.

Of course, the smart fridge likely will have worse cooling performance than a regular one, just like a smartphone drops calls more often than an old flip phone.

No thanks... I'll take an absorption fridge that actually is worth the price premium any day over a smart fridge.

Re:Power grab by the big boys

[I_have_a_life]

I'd like to address some of the ill-informed knee-jerk reactions on this topic. In the interest of full disclosure, I should also mention that I work for GE Digital (as an engineer). Regarding "actual IoT entities", some of the firmware/software that we built is test on these platforms because in many situations they are convenient for testing I myself have a collection of Raspberry Pis, Arduinos, Parallax Propellers, Basic Stamps, etc. But let's be real, here's a list of the "things" that GE builds:

• Jet Engines (http://www.geaviation.com/engines)
• Healthcare Imaging Devices (http://www3.gehealthcare.com/en/products/categories)
• Wind Turbines (https://renewables.gepower.com/wind-energy/turbines.html)
• Locomotives (http://www.getransportation.com/locomotives)
• Industrial Scale Water Treatment (http://www.gewater.com/)
• Turbines for Power Generation (https://powergen.gepower.com/products/heavy-duty-gas-turbines.html)

The list above is not exhaustive but it's enough to illustrate the point. All of the equipment built by GE uses a multitude of sensors and Industrial Control Systems and GE Digital is invested in building PaaS solutions on open source software to help bring data from those sensors into the cloud and run analytics that improve reduce cost and improve efficiency. In fact, GE has been doing this for many years the only thing that's changed is that now there is an organization, GE Digital, dedicated to standardizing the hardware, firmware, software, and security of these systems. You don't get more IoT than that.

The problem is one of perception, because we take things like power generation, water purification, air travel, healthcare for granted. We don't realize that there's a massive amount of software, data, and analytics needed to run these things and tremendous room for efficiency gains with the right software. We're so obsessed with smart phones, smart watches, fitness devices, and companies building consumer products we forget the foundation on which these things rely on.

As far as the security in the IoT space is concerned, GE made an investment to buy Wurldtech (http://techcrunch.com/2014/05/09/ge-buys-wurldtech-to-beef-up-internet-of-things-industrial-infrastructure-security), a company that specializes in securing ICS. They build systems designed to both passively, and actively mitigate against threats. In addition to that, it's probably worth noting that GE has several divisions dedicated to both IT security and cyber security research. Finally, I can state that GE is contributing to open source projects that provide software security capabilities (e.g. authentication services) by both writing code and performing ongoing penetration testing. Also keep in mind that many of these systems are deployed on private clouds and some which service critical infrastructure are not directly connected to the internet (think on-site cloud computing).

I've been reading Slashdot for a while and I know there's a sort of cynical anti-establishment attitude around here. Honestly, it's what drew me to this forum in the first place. It's funny though, being on the other side, seeing how much vitriol gets thrown around that's terribly ill-informed. It definitely gives me some perspective.

Re:Power grab by the big boys

[erapert]

Not even ARM Holdings, whose chips designs will be in most IoT devices.

Didn't you notice that Intel and Microsoft are on the list? This is a move by the Old Guard to gather all their old allies so they can get into IoT and the maker movement now that IoT and "making" have been around for a couple years and have proven that there's some money to be made. They're trying to infiltrate the grassroots tech scene-- and IoT and the maker movement are the core.

Time will tell whether this is good or bad. But considering the likes of Microsoft are involved I'm not holding my breath.

Re: Power grab by the big boys

[I_have_a_life]

What's fucking sad are conspiracy theorists. GE, like all companies, has problems but your analysis is obviously juvenile trolling.

Re:Power grab by the big boys

[Dracos]

MS has made their play into IoT with Win10 IoT. The problem lies in that MS has made the requirements and capabilities so ridiculous that only MS-stack people give any shits about Win10 IoT. Anything else running on an rPi is a fully capable computer, but Win10 IoT on Pi is just bloated bootloader for a Universal (read: only runs on WIn10) app.

Re:Power grab by the big boys

[thegarbz]

lol hardware security. This is ARM trying to look like they are important in a sector where none of what they say matters. The marketing spiel looks like something destined for the mobile phone industry which someone did a search and replace with IoT just so they look like they matter in the market.

Sure let's get fancy ARM Trustzone super secure hardware, it'll go well with our hardcoded default admin passwords.

Don't get me wrong. ARM has a major part to play in IoT, but as the designer of low-power CPU cores which ultimately has nothing to do with IoT itself. They are as much of an IoT company as the Chinese production line cranking out low-cost surface mount resistors. They provide interchangeable components. When ARM start getting in the business of selling purpose built integrated SoCs rather than licensing (admittedly very good) designs to 3rd parties, then we can talk about their influence on IoT.

Re:Apple is not present

[Dahamma]

Actually Samsung bought SmartThings a while ago, so they are at least in the game. The others (excepting maybe GE, which has a fair number of Z-Wave devices) are currently on the sidelines trying to figure out a way to get in it.

Antitrust a few decades down the road.

[Ungrounded Lightning]

The lineup includes ARRIS, CableLabs, Cisco, Electrolux, GE Digital, Intel, Microsoft, Qualcomm, and Samsung, which will all work closely with one another to set rules and specifications to guarantee a singular advancement in the field.

I read that as "pool patents and close the technology against the garage-shop upstarts".

Maybe something like what happened with WiMax. Some friends and I tried to do a garage shop startup with it, but couldn't get chips or timely standards drafts because we weren't one of the large companies that formed the coalition.

Fortunately the three major vendors of IoT systems-on-a-chip (TI, Nordic, and Dialog) are being clueful about getting devices and development kits into any hands reaching for them, at prices a kid in his mom's basement can afford. (TI's first generation had a mandatory tie-in with a $3,000/seat development system from another vendor, but that's not a problem for the others or, I think, TI's latest gen.)

The garage shops (some of whom have customers with products in trial or production) have already stolen a march on the big guys when it comes to IoT. So this looks like, not an attempt to head off, but to co-opt or FUD-out, the horde of independents. A frantic move by the big companies, before they are nibbled to death by ducks.

Re:Antitrust a few decades down the road.

[drinkypoo]

All of these guys are going to get absolutely spanked in IoT by folks like Expressif who are bringing out workable hardware right now at prices similar to what folks like Intel would charge for a connector, let alone a SoC. Standards are cool, but cheap wins

Re:Antitrust a few decades down the road.

[Richard_at_work]

Microsoft already ships a codebase that runs on the Raspberry Pi 2, MinnowBoard Max et al, so how are they going to get spanked by a company that is yet to bring out hardware at all?

Especially when Expressif has a website that I cannot use in Chrome!

Re:Antitrust a few decades down the road.

[drinkypoo]

Microsoft already ships a codebase that runs on the Raspberry Pi 2, MinnowBoard Max et al, so how are they going to get spanked by a company that is yet to bring out hardware at all?

Uh, what? Expressif has been shipping hardware, and they are about to drop a replacement for the ESP8266, a whole second generation of their SoC. That's the opposite of not bringing out hardware.

Especially when Expressif has a website that I cannot use in Chrome!

Fuck Chrome.

Re:Antitrust a few decades down the road.

[Ungrounded Lightning]

The problem is that there are a lot of things on Kickstarter, but each project, be it a BT enabled padlock or some iPhone accessory are built with zero thought other than getting the project out the door.

It would be nice to have some IoT security guidelines, dev kits, and such which automatically have a standard of security ready to go.

The Bluetooth SIG already defines BLE security protocols and sample pairing strategies in their (3000+ page!) standards document.

The major vendors each built hardware security protocol acceleration into their chips and each supply a dev kit which includes stack and library support and sample code for using their security implementation in typical scenarios.

Granted a typical development cycle is:
1. Engineering gets the baseline functionality working first, intending it as a proof-of-concept demonstration and to turn on the security features when they do the good-enough-to-ship version.
2. Management and marketing is in a race to beat the competition through the window-of-opportunity (and slam it behind them). They show the just-got-it-limping proof-of-concept to potential customers (industrial) or sales channels (consumer), and investors (both).
3. If they like it, industrial customers do a trial deployment of the prototype, to see how it integrates into their process. Management (which will usually either be totally clueless of the engineering chasm between prototype and ready-for-prime-time, or optimistically underestimate it) makes scheduling promises to the customers and pushes engineering to meet them. Typically only the functionality is upgraded and debugged at this stage. Security is not on the timetable.
4. If they decide it works for them, the industrial customer brings in their I.T. department, which gives them their security requirements and prepares for a security audit. Now getting the security right (or at least right enough to satisfy some big customer) becomes a hotbutton item.

But for consumer, goods, replace 3. with "Get the prototype looking flashy enough for a trade show, show it, and sell it." and 4. with "After it's out there somebody finds several ways to break into it." B-b

Also: There's an FCC approval process just before the trade show, which tends to make any later upgrades to the firmware difficult and expensive. Maybe you get a "permissive change", maybe you have to pay the lab for $ome rete$ting.

Re:Antitrust a few decades down the road.

[Ungrounded Lightning]

Drifted away from my point there...

The major vendors each built hardware security protocol acceleration into their chips and each supply a dev kit which includes stack and library support and sample code for using their security implementation in typical scenarios.

With a standards organization already on the job, only three or so major chip vendors, trying to sell their products with the bulk of the market already in their pockets, necessarily shipping their customers the dev kits that must support whatever standard arises, and with a need for their products to interact (because the central and peripheral end of a connection may be different vendors' chips), it seems to me that THESE are the players who are likely to come up with a usable standard. A consortium of pre-IoT giants who missed the boat and are trying to take it over mid-ocean may find it well defended.

Re:Cartel?

[Dahamma]

Except these companies getting together to "lock" up the IoT / Home Automation market is like Hasbro and LEGO getting together to lock up the home construction market.

Next step in technological advancement

[penguinoid]

Specifically, the next step in technological advancement of omnipresent surveillance/"telemetry" and of vendor lock-in and of forced upgrades and of dependency on corporate services. If that sounds good, just wait until some joker writes a virus to make your lightbulbs blink obscene messages in Morse code or pit your heater against your air conditioner.

Re:Next step in technological advancement

[AmiMoJo]

Dick called it:

The door refused to open. It said, âoeFive cents, please.â

He searched his pockets. No more coins; nothing. âoeIâ(TM)ll pay you tomorrow,â he told the door. Again he tried the knob. Again it remained locked tight. âoeWhat I pay you,â he informed it, âoeis in the nature of a gratuity; I donâ(TM)t have to pay you.â

âoeI think otherwise,â the door said. âoeLook in the purchase contract you signed when you bought this conapt.â

In his desk drawer he found the contract; since signing it he had found it necessary to refer to the document many times. Sure enough; payment to his door for opening and shutting constituted a mandatory fee. Not a tip.

âoeYou discover Iâ(TM)m right,â the door said. It sounded smug.

From the drawer beside the sink Joe Chip got a stainless steel knife; with it he began systematically to unscrew the bolt assembly of his aptâ(TM)s money-gulping door.

âoeIâ(TM)ll sue you,â the door said as the first screw fell out.

Joe Chip said, âoeIâ(TM)ve never been sued by a door. But I guess I can live through it.â

Re:Apple is not present

[mikael]

Like the Japanese "TRON" project:

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/...

A singular advancement

[Todd Knarr]

Would that be a single interface specification for manufacturers to query activity information? A single specification for insuring devices only work with other devices manufactured or licensed by this alliance?

I'd end with </sarcasm>, but anymore that'd just be immediately followed an another <sarcasm>.

Re:Apple is not present

[Darinbob]

None of those are really IoT companies, except maybe Cisco. But if they set the standards then they can catch up and lock out the little guys.

Open? Closed?

[Anonymous Coward]

From the blurb: "...banding together to form the Open Connectivity Foundation [...] which will all work closely with one another to set rules and specifications..."

Wat?

Having seen the list of corps I've got a hunch about which kind of open they mean.

The MPEGLA scam all over again

[Required Snark]

We've seen this before.

1. Form a group and make it an official international standard.

2. Have licensing arm (like MPEGLA) to administer the patents from the standard.

3. Profit.

There is not mystery step 2 in this case. It's just like paying taxes, except instead of the government the money goes directly to the international corporations (and a few academic institutions who are in on the scam). The government and the law are just collection agents for the corporations. Combine this with treaties like the TPP and it becomes obvious that corporate interests are intent on dominating, well everything. Sovereign states become the errand boys and actual source of power is privatized.

Seriously?

[scdeimos]

Half those players were involved in DLNA (DHWG) and look how well that worked out. Hint: most DLNA servers need client-specific profiles to hack the data streams so that they render correctly on the client.

As of November 2015, there are 13 promoter members and 171 contributor members. The promoter members are: Arris, AwoX, Broadcom, CableLabs, Comcast, Dolby Laboratories, Intel, LG Electronics, Panasonic, Samsung Electronics, Sony Electronics, Time Warner Cable, and Verizon.

REF: Digital Living Network Alliance

Re:Seriously?

[thegarbz]

They were missing Microsoft. Microsoft's innovation as a market leader in technology and excellent track record on network security is what will make the IoT alliance a success.

What a ridiculous thing to claim

[pablo_max]

That is a completely ridiculous comment.
I think that you have no concept of how standards groups and certifications work.
Without everyone complying to the same standard AND actually testing the products against said standards, the technology will never take off.

Take Bluetooth for example. In the early days, the BT SIG made folks test the physical layers of the device, but not the profiles. As such, the link layer was great, but using the products sucked. Then they started testing the profile stack as well and things got better.
Now, through the use a free tool, (for members) you can test all the profiles you implement and behold...a working duhicky!

At the moment, there are several firms pushing their own platforms with respect to the IoT and none of these things interact with things from other companies.
This is not good for consumers. In the end, it's also not good for companies.

Re:What a ridiculous thing to claim

[Locke2005]

What you see as a problem others may see as an opportunity, i.e. to create a hub that can translate requests between the half dozen different IoT "standards".

Re:What a ridiculous thing to claim

[Dahamma]

So, I suppose I should take the high road and ignore your assholish tone, but oh well, not today.

I know exactly how standards groups work. I have been on a few. How about you? And I am not as naive as you to think that when a bunch of companies who have as of yet missed the boat get together, it somehow ends up magically setting standards.

Your comment was a bunch of hot air, with nothing new. Much like this new "Alliance".

At the moment, there are several firms pushing their own platforms with respect to the IoT and none of these things interact with things from other companies.

It's funny, looking at your other /. comments the theme seems to be that using ad hominem is much preferred to actual knowledge or research. Have you tried SmartThings? Or any other home automation controller, for that matter? The whole point of the original ST project was to work with as many devices as possible. It uses a combination of existing HA standards (IP, Z-Wave, Zigbee) with an open API for developers to write their own plugin/protocol support. Which is why I mentioned it. For fuck's sake, next time at least do a LITTLE bit of research before you spout off.

Internet of Trechery

[Anonymous Coward]

We already know we can't trust Microsoft, Samsung, or Cisco for sure, and have good reason to doubt Intel. Now we know we also cannot trust ARRIS, CableLabs, Electrolux, GE Digital, or Qualcomm either.

If I wasn't already well entrenched in my career in IT, I would cut the cord. Alas it's too deeply integrated with my life to do that without starting over from square one. Feeling a bit trapped.

Re:Apple is not present

[WarJolt]

It's funny Amazon isn't in there. They are the only ones with a good IoT api. Since they own almost all of the cloud computing market and they are basically great at selling us everything I think that's worth an invite.

Re:Remind me again

[Mouldy]

It was nice to have Netflix run directly on my TV.
Until Panasonic decided that they couldn't be bothered to keep the app updated

It's nice to be able to put the kettle on when I'm 5 minutes from my house.
Except the experience doesn't let you check how much water is in the kettle first, the kettle cannot keep a stable wifi connection, and as far as boiling water goes; it's a really bad kettle and it takes a really long time.

It's nice for my washing machine to be able to send a diagnostic report to my phone that I can then show an engineer who can then determine the issue more reliably (and therefore cheaply to me).
But it's not great that the machine is now 90% computer and most faults need to be addressed by replacing logic boards; which is not something that can be done cheaply.


Connected devices is fine in my book; they can be useful. The problem is more often than not, the implementation is just bad. Company in industry x thinking they can just do industry y just hasn't been working;
Tech companies know which corners can be cut and at what costs when they're developing their bread & butter.
Appliance companies know which corners they can cut and at what costs when they're developing their bread and butter.
Appliance companies that are developing tech either; don't know enough about tech so screw it up, or, worse, think they know enough about tech to know which corners to cut and royally screw it up.

To reframe the issue slightly;
I would not trust a washing machine made by Facebook to not leak on a particular cycle.
I wouldn't trust a fridge made by Microsoft to not get frosted up every couple of days.
I wouldn't trust a car made by Apple to not require an obscure sized nozzle on a fuel pump.
Why would I expect a kettle company to build a phone app with good UX?


It would be nice if non-tech companies could add tech to their products in a good way; but unfortunately, it's just not their area of expertise. And quite often, their area that they should be good at suffers because they're trying to focus on the tech side of things.

IoT is becoming mandatory, as well

[Anonymous Coward]

I've been shopping for a new HVAC unit for my home, and I'm shocked that there are very few I can even buy above SEER 16 that do not have mandatory internet connectivity in order to function. They even tried to sell me one that had an "zero-interface thermostat." The thermostat was in the unit and was controlled via smart-phone app - not directly between the phone and the HVAC unit, mind you. The HVAC unit phones home, and the smartphone app phones home, and so I request a temperature from the manufacturer's server, and the manufacturer's server tells the unit what to do. Completely ridiculous and unnecessary.

The IoT is a curse, not a blessing. It's just one more way for manufacturers to collect data about your personal habits and preferences, so they can sell that data to marketers. Of course, then there's government/NSA/etc...

Re:IoT is becoming mandatory, as well

[jenningsthecat]

I've been shopping for a new HVAC unit for my home, and I'm shocked that there are very few I can even buy above SEER 16 that do not have mandatory internet connectivity in order to function. They even tried to sell me one that had an "zero-interface thermostat." The thermostat was in the unit and was controlled via smart-phone app - not directly between the phone and the HVAC unit, mind you. The HVAC unit phones home, and the smartphone app phones home, and so I request a temperature from the manufacturer's server, and the manufacturer's server tells the unit what to do. Completely ridiculous and unnecessary.

The IoT is a curse, not a blessing. It's just one more way for manufacturers to collect data about your personal habits and preferences, so they can sell that data to marketers. Of course, then there's government/NSA/etc...

Replying to this to make sure it doesn't get buried at 0. If what you say is true, then it's really, really scary.

Re:IoT is becoming mandatory, as well

[Locke2005]

So, if your internet connection goes out, your pipes freeze up, then?

Re:IoT is becoming mandatory, as well

[isj]

Do you happen to remember manufacturer/model of the zero-interface thermostat? Because that sounds so unbelievably stupid that there might be something you or the salesman overlooked. It could also be their attempt at lock-in.

Biggest Issue: Why does anybody need this shit?

[Anonymous Coward]

No, the biggest issue is that IoT is a solution in search of a problem. There really isn't that much of a value proposition for the consumer. I don't need my fucking coffee maker talking to my toaster or my microwave or my thermostat or doorbell. I don't need my refrigerator noticing that I'm almost out of milk, and reordering milk from Amazon at twice the price I could pay at the convenience store down the street.

Just one example: An IP-connected thermostat is only marginally more useful than a digital programmable thermostat that is 10x cheaper and has existed for 30 years. How often do you REALLY need to change the temperature in your home while you aren't there? Yes, it's nice to be able to make your home all comfy and cozy for you when you arrive, but are you really fucking suffering now without this ability? So much that it's worth paying more $100 or $200 or $300 for the privilege, as well as creating one more opening for security risks in your network? Don't you usually know when you are going to get home most days, so you could just program a 'dumb' thermostat to ramp up the heat before you arrive?

IoT might evolve into some compelling use case for the consumer someday, but for now it can burn in hell along with those fucking stupid Dash Buttons from Amazon.

Re:Biggest Issue: Why does anybody need this shit?

[Locke2005]

Actually, I want to be able to tell my Amazon Echo to turn off the lights, because I'm too lazy to get out of the bed and walk over to the light switch. So there is some application for an IoT, but I'm not sure the $500 it takes to achieve a voice-activated light switch is really worth it for all consumers.

Re:Biggest Issue: Why does anybody need this shit?

[Locke2005]

Another example: Do you know how often I need to leave work, drive home, and let my daughter into the house because the stupid bitch forgot her key? It would be really nice to be able to unlock the door remotely. (I haven't yet put an electronic keypad lock on the front door like I had for her all while she was growing up. She can actually remember PIN codes.)

Re:Biggest Issue: Why does anybody need this shit?

[sjames]

At $500, it would be cheaper to add a wired light switch next to the bed.

Re:Biggest Issue: Why does anybody need this shit?

[sjames]

So what does idIoT give you that the keypad doesn't?

Re:Biggest Issue: Why does anybody need this shit?

[Waffle Iron]

I'm not sure that letting some dicey app and its authors control my door via the "cloud" is any more secure than just putting a key under the doormat. It certainly costs more.

Re:Biggest Issue: Why does anybody need this shit?

[Grishnakh]

Actually, one thing I really would like is a house that responds to voice commands and does more things automatically for me. I don't want it all going through my phone though (though it might be nice to have some kind of status display app on my phone to check up on my home while I'm away). But for starters and an example, it'd be really nice if I could use a voice command at night to turn on the lights, instead of having to fumble around in the dark for a switch. It'd be even nicer if I could use a voice command to turn the lights on at low-brightness, or better yet in red, so that I could go to the bathroom without being blinded or messing up my Circadian rhythms; it'd make it easier to fall back asleep when I'm done. Now maybe you're thinking something like "I have a touch lamp next to my bed so this isn't a big problem for me", but the touch lamp isn't going to let you easily select nighttime red illumination, AND light up a pathway all the way to the bathroom, and the bathroom itself, with nighttime red illumination for you. But a voice command like "red illumination to bathroom" could do all that for you.

There's plenty of other applications for this: motorized blinds, also activated by voice, would be nice: when you wake up, you can say "open all blinds" and you'd be greeted by sunshine while still in bed, without having to walk around your room and do it manually. You could also have a voice command to turn on your shower and run it until the water is hot. (Point-of-use heaters would make this less necessary, but you could have voice commands to turn it on at a preset temperature, so different users can have different presets.)

Also very useful would be voice notifications from your house: it could tell you when there's some kind of problem with the HVAC, or warn you that running the HVAC with the windows open is stupid, or that your cat's litter box needs to be emptied. It could also warn you, through your phone, that someone's inside your house when you're not expecting anyone.

Re:Biggest Issue: Why does anybody need this shit?

[Dragonslicer]

Actually, I want to be able to tell my Amazon Echo to turn off the lights, because I'm too lazy to get out of the bed and walk over to the light switch.

That problem was solved 30 years ago.

There's also my $10 solution, which is commonly called a "desk lamp".

Really?

[jenningsthecat]

The Internet of Things (IoT) is the next step toward technological advancement...

The Internet of Things (IoT) is the next step toward technological enslavement...

FTFY.

Re:Really?

[Locke2005]

"I for one welcome our new computer overlords!"

Re:marketing vomit

[jenningsthecat]

i simply can't believe it. yet another buzzword from some marketing...

That was kinda my first thought too. Then I remembered 'the cloud'. Some marketing BS, like some Science Fiction, has a way of becoming real and integral to our daily lives.

The great thing about standards...

[Locke2005]

... is there are so many to choose from!
Does this mean SmartThings is becoming the de-facto standard?

Re:This sounds really scary!

[Locke2005]

I can't get into the panic room... the internet controlled lock on the door won't open!

Re:Remind me again

[Locke2005]

You forgot the timeless adage: "The day Microsoft makes something that doesn't suck is probably the day they start making vacuum cleaners!"

Re:Remind me again

[Locke2005]

Your appliances... they're talking about you behind your back!

Re:Apple is not present

[Grishnakh]

Microsoft is looking forward to having a Windows variant running on every small device in the home. It'll be great when you can't make toast in the morning before you rush out for work because your toaster has to download a bunch of updates and apply them and reboot before it'll make any toast.

Re:Cartel?

[Grishnakh]

Most Android phones these days don't have removable memory cards. That's considered a high-end feature, and Samsung even dropped that feature from the Galaxy S6.

Re:Apple is not present

[Junta]

Which circles back around to the 'successful are not bothering'. Cisco largely ignores standard body efforts around network management, Amazon has ignored various initiatives to craft some inter operable cloud computing standards. The industry is rich with examples.

Re:Remind me again

[hankwang]

"the [washing] machine is now 90% computer and most faults need to be addressed by replacing logic boards; which is not something that can be done cheaply."

Not cheaply, unlike, for example, the mechanical dial 20 years ago that contained all washing programs in electrical switches and that would break if you or a toddler turned it counterclockwise?

Re:Apple is not present

[Dahamma]

Actually, they don't have much of an "IoT" API, just an API to do things in the cloud with Echo/Alexa. Their IoT integration requires them to integrate with the client (Echo) firmware to do things like discover Philips Hue controllers, etc. (and it's not a matter of "invitation" - if Amazon wanted to be a part of that Alliance they others would be falling all over themselves).

The big company with the "best" IoT API is probably Apple's HomeKit. But I put "best" in quotes because it's only a good API if you agree to drink every last drop of Apple Koolaid - as usual, they have a lot of really onerous restrictions and licensing to make hardware products using it, and there was ZERO thought of compatibility with any of the current home automation protocols like Z-Wave or Zigbee. (Note Google did essentially the same thing with "Works with Nest", an awful cloud-based design to interface with their products).

Having done a lot of home automation, Samsung's SmartThings is probably one of the best products out there (from a major company, at least). It's currently plagued by a horribly buggy software release and overloaded servers, but the technology (a home controller with hardware support for most HA protocols, plus good support for user-created plugins) is at least fairly good, and OPEN. There are a bunch of less well known products (Vera, Wink, HomeSeer, etc) that are as good or better, but given their lack of funding and vision they will probably always be niche...

Re:Cartel?

[Dahamma]

That would be true if the HA market wasn't already like 30+ years old. The actual "players" and innovators already have plenty of patents or prior art.

There are some of these "Alliances" that actually build momentum and make sense (see: UHD Alliance). This does not look like one of those.