back to article Grab a fork! Unravelling the Internet of Things' standards spaghetti

The great thing about standards is that there are always so many to choose from. We've seen the standards forest grow countless times before. The Internet of Things is a vast digital petri dish for them, and they just keep growing. Recently we've acquired another initiative to pull together vendors working in IoT. It's called …

  1. Doctor Syntax Silver badge

    Does anyone else find it alarming that Danny could only find two opportunities to mention the word "security" in the entire article - and one of those was part of a company name?

    The BrickerBot's author's work isn't over yet: https://www.bleepingcomputer.com/news/security/brickerbot-dev-claims-cyber-attack-that-affected-over-60-000-indian-modems/

  2. Adrian 4 Silver badge
    Facepalm

    shoot lower

    "Let's just hope that your smart thermostat is smart enough to accommodate some fairly hefty firmware updates. In the future, it may need them."

    Don't you mean :

    "Let's just hope that your smart thermostat survives for a few months before it's orphaned and never updated again"

    1. Anonymous Coward
      Anonymous Coward

      Re: shoot lower

      Internet of shit devices are effectively orphaned at point of sale.

      1. steelpillow Silver badge

        Re: shoot lower

        "Internet of shit devices are effectively orphaned at point of sale."

        You forgot the ones plugged in and pwned by the entire Internet within ten minutes.

      2. John Smith 19 Gold badge
        Thumb Up

        "Internet of shit devices are effectively orphaned at point of sale."

        Nice turn of phrase. Thumbs up.

        Actual behavior being described not so nice.

  3. jake Silver badge

    Well ...

    "Let's just hope that your smart thermostat is smart enough to accommodate some fairly hefty firmware updates. In the future, it may need them."

    My greenhouse's "smart thermostat" has been running for over thirty years. It maintains the temperature to within 2 degrees either way quite nicely. I haven't needed to update any code for at least thirty of those years. Why not? Because it works as intended. It's a thermostat, and just does thermostat stuff. Nothing needs updating. Perhaps a point for the IoT folks to ponder ...

    1. lidgaca

      Re: Well ...

      Yeah, but how the hell can we *sell* you stuff if all you have is a simple thermostat ?

    2. Anonymous Coward
      Anonymous Coward

      Re: Well ...

      But your thermostat can't send data back to the manufacturer. Without data it can't show relevant ads.

      If your thermostat is showing irrelevant ads, you only have yourself to blame YOU LUDDITE.

    3. Doctor Syntax Silver badge

      Re: Well ...

      "My greenhouse's "smart thermostat" has been running for over thirty years."

      It can't be that smart if it's still working. If it was smart it would've retired years ago.

  4. jMcPhee

    Down the road, people are going to want to sell their houses which they've riddled with all this dysfunctional (and from a standards standpoint, obsolete) IoT junk. Wonder how that's going to work out...

    1. TRT Silver badge

      Good point. Hm... I think I'll just go for installing a cabinet with DIN rails and relays next to the incoming data network. Manual overrides on everything... a Raspberry Pi with an onto isolator on the GPIO... custom web interface that's responsive and can be webapp'd onto the home screen... should last a decade or more. I pity the fool that has to rely on Google et al supporting their shit for the lifetime of the house.

  5. TeeCee Gold badge
    Facepalm

    Just switch it on and watch it connect...

    ...to a bent server in Russia.

  6. Treggy
    Pint

    Quote

    +1 for paraphrased Tanenbaum quote.

  7. OliP

    this is completely on point - its ridiculous.

    recently seen that MiLight aka LimitlessLED now has something like 10-15 different protocols for talking to each of their products via two hubs. 3rd party devs are just giving up supporting it all.

    its only going to get worse

  8. vir

    Here are some standards I'd like to see

    Independent security certification for IoT devices.

    Devices that continue to perform their intended function without connection to a remote server.

    Obligated period of support from manufacturer with clearly stated end-of-life behavior.

    Clear explanation of what kind of data is recorded and how it is used.

    Data handling and retention policy that takes data security seriously and puts privacy first.

    Business practices that don't rely on monetizing customer data to ensure continued solvency.

    Now I just need to start on step one of my plan for world domination and we should have usable IoT devices in no time.

  9. This post has been deleted by its author

  10. John Smith 19 Gold badge
    Go

    If the Linux foundation provides model source code that doesn't use hard coded IDs

    and other s**t coding patterns I'm all for it.

    Maybe some of those code monkeys who "write" the s**t for IoT tat might drop that in, rather than whatever b**locks code source they normally cut and paste their vuln ridden code from.

    You have to ask what's the goal you want to achieve?

    I think most IoT ideas are s**t, but do we all agree that secure IoT is better than insecure IoT?

    The next PC that a botnet of compromised IoT things attacks could be yours.

    Or worse yet, mine.

POST COMMENT House rules

Not a member of The Register? Create a new account here.

  • Enter your comment

  • Add an icon

Anonymous cowards cannot choose their icon

Biting the hand that feeds IT © 1998–2019