DOCSLIB.ORG

Avoid the Silos and Help Build the True Internet of Things

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text
Avoid the Silos and Help Build the True Internet of Things Avoid the Silos and Help Build the True Internet of Things April 2016 Aaron Vernon, CTO at Higgns [email protected] I N T R O D U C T I O N ● Aaron Vernon, CTO at Higgns ● Previously I was VP Software Engineering at LIFX and CTO at Two Bulls ● Chair of the AllSeen Alliance Common Frameworks Working Group ● I am going to cover the following: ○ The complexities of the current IoT landscape ○ How this affects companies and users ○ The Internet of Silos example ○ How we can work together better Transports W i F i ● Uses the 802.11 standard ● Standard on all mobile devices and routers ● Has become ubiquitous for users ● Great range ● Great bandwidth ● High power consumption ● High cost ● Onboarding experience can be complicated ● Examples: Nest Cam, LIFX, Canary, Honeywell Lyric B L U E T O O T H S M A R T ● Standard on most mobile devices ● Becoming increasingly ubiquitous ● Low bandwidth ● Medium range ● Low power consumption ● Low cost ● Smart Mesh is being worked on ● Examples: Flic, Ilumi, Elgato Eve Z I G B E E ● Uses the 802.15.4 standard ● Low bandwidth ● Low range ● Low power consumption ● Very low cost ● Forms a mesh network ● Typically requires a hub for the radio ● Known to have interop and interference problems ● Examples: Phillips Hue, large amount of sensors and actuators Z W A V E ● Proprietary - chips developed by a single manufacturer ● Uses different frequencies in different countries ● Low bandwidth ● Medium range ● Low power consumption ● Very low cost ● Forms a mesh network ● Better interoperability and less interference than ZigBee ● Typically requires a hub for the radio ● Examples: large amount of sensors and actuators, particularly in the home security sector T H R E A D ● Uses the 802.15.4 and 6LoWPAN standards ● Can be bridged to the cloud relatively easily ● Low bandwidth ● Medium range ● Low power consumption ● Low cost ● Forms a mesh network ● ZigBee devices can be upgraded to Thread ● Early days but a lot of potential ● Will require a hub for the radio ● Examples: Google OnHub, Nest, more products coming soon (certification launched last November) E N O C E A N ● Ultra low bandwidth ● Energy harvesting - no power consumption ● Medium range ● Low cost ● Requires a special purpose antenna and a hub ● Examples: large amount of sensors and actuators Protocols and Ecosystems O C F & I O T I V I T Y ● OCF (formerly OIC) is a standards body formed in 2014 and host sponsor of this event! ● Sponsors the Linux Foundation IoTivity project which provides the open source reference implementation ● No shipped devices yet but strong progress on specifications and solid code architecture ideas ● Uses a resource based REST model and is transport agnostic ● Currently available on Linux, Tizen and Android ● Prominent members: Intel, Samsung, Microsoft, Qualcomm, Electrolux, Cisco, GE Digital A L L J O Y N ● Started as a Qualcomm project but was made open source in 2013 and the AllSeen Alliance was formed ● A fully open source Linux Foundation project ● A code first approach to IoT which has allowed over 250 million devices to already be in the hands of consumers ● Uses a Client Server RPC model and is transport agnostic ● Officially supported on iOS, Android, Linux (OpenWRT) and Windows ● Prominent members: Philips, LG, Sharp, Sony, Electrolux, Microsoft, Qualcomm, Haier, Canon A P P L E H O M E K I T ● Apple’s answer to IoT that was announced in 2014 ● A huge amount of market demand but relatively few available devices ● The tallest walled garden in IoT - you need an MFi chip in your device in order to support HomeKit ● Siri support and Apple’s customary User Experience could result in a very successful ecosystem but the path there is not clear at the moment: ○ HomeKit APIs only supported on iOS ○ MFi process is very strenuous ○ Where is the killer app from Apple? G O O G L E W E A V E ● Not yet public but I feel good about the approach they are taking ● Will likely be heavily coupled with Google’s Cloud ● Uses a resource based REST model and is initially focussed on WiFi and BLE ● Can’t say much more but if you are interested then join the early access program N E S T W E A V E ● Yes really! A separate thing to Google Weave! ● Nest gets that true IoT needs to be proximal so Nest Weave runs exclusively over Thread ● Low power and low latency ● Super exciting technology but unfortunately a completely walled ‘Works with Nest’ garden ● Nest seems to run as an Apple like company within Google - this has pros and cons E N O C E A N, Z I G B E E, Z W A V E & B L U E T O O T H S M A R T ● Enocean, Zigbee, Z-Wave & Bluetooth all have Alliance organizations that have defined device profiles ● Zigbee and Z-Wave device profiles are fragmented and not universally adopted ● Bluetooth Smart uses GATT profiles (Generic Attribute profiles) but the device support is not very broad S A M S U N G S M A R T T H I N G S ● A startup born out of a Kickstarter campaign that was acquired by Samsung in 2014 ● It includes a hub, cloud platform and client apps ● Has a robust device ecosystem including ZigBee, Z-Wave and WiFi devices ● Quite a successful open ecosystem but Samsung owns the user relationship which is going to be problematic for a lot of companies ● Not really competitive to the entities I have covered here but worth mentioning because it has a considerable mindshare When a company wants to get involved in IoT T H E S T U F F For the purpose of this section I am going to reference transports, protocols, ecosystems, etc, as STUFF C H A L L E N G E S F O R C O M P A N I E S ● A company wants to make an IoT product or service ● The company spends a large amount of time building and maintaining support for the stuff ● There is a limited amount of stuff that can physically fit in an embedded device ● Users are confused about what stuff they actually need/want ● The end result is the company struggles as they spend most of their time working on the stuff rather than the actual differential value they want to deliver to users When a user wants to get involved in IoT C H A L L E N G E S F O R U S E R S ● A user is enticed to buy a starter kit from an ecosystem ● The learning curve is steep but they eventually get everything onboarded and working ● A new device comes out that they really want but it does not work with their ecosystem at launch ● Regardless they buy the device and have to learn a new way of onboarding and controlling a device ● To get the full benefit of the new device they buy more devices from an ecosystem it is part of E N D R E S U L T Repeat this process a few times and now the user has several competing ecosystems, multiple device silos and a bunch of apps that all function in a unique way... ...and we wonder why consumer IoT has not taken off yet! The Internet of Silos Imagine for a moment that HTTP never came to be and the internet was like IoT is right now... It would take 15mins to load your first website, 3hrs if you have certain types of routers... Every time you click a link you would have to install a new browser to consume the content... Sometimes you may even need to purchase and plug in a new dongle just to follow the link... When you want to read the news you forget which of your 10 browsers (that all have different UI/UX) you need to use... There would be the W3C and the W3A - both would contain roughly the same companies and claim to be open and the only path forward... ...yet everyone would keep telling you how fucking awesome the Internet is! Working Together T R U E I O T E X A M P L E I was going to fill this slide with a utopian vision of what true IoT would look like but the truth is we all already know what this looks like and how it would work; we just need to build it. W E N E E D T O D O B E T T E R ● Hopefully it was evident from this presentation that we need to do better! ● If we want to be the multi billion dollar sector the world is expecting then we need to reach mainstream consumers ● Idealistic, but if we grow the space together there will be enough revenue to go around - stop trying to be the platform and start contributing to a real ecosystem R E M E M B E R T H E U S E R S A N D U S E C A S E S ● IoT needs to be about the users and use cases ● Focus on trying to deliver the notable use cases that we all want and a side effect will be that the IoT environment will be improved ● Most mainstream users don’t even know what IoT is and what devices they have are considered ‘IoT devices’ ● Focus on usability and solve real problems Working Together with an Open Source Protocol O N E O P E N S O L U T I O N ● The ideal way forward is a simple open source protocol and cross platform framework that can exist outside of all the walled gardens and bridge between them ● This would provide a lowest common denominator for IoT ● Currently there are two competing open source LF projects AllJoyn and IoTivity (an implementation of OCF) ● I know there is a lot of high level business at play here… but seriously - can we please just figure this shit out? ● We must pool our minds, resources and efforts O N E O P E N S O L U T I O N AllJoyn Open Protocol X Google Weave Enocean Open Protocol X Open Protocol X Open Protocol X Open Protocol X OCF/IoTivity Nest Weave Open Protocol X ZigBee K E E P I T S I M P L E S T U P I D ● At its most basic level the open source solution needs to contain schemas for devices and the ability to transfer these schemas across a network using different transports ● In my opinion, it should focus on transferring with IPv6 over WiFi, Thread and Bluetooth Smart to get a good
Load more

Recommended publications
  • Woo Project Overview
    WoO Approach General Overview WF-IoT 2014 Mihaela Brut, Patrick Gatellier Thales Services, France Ilyoung Chong, Hankuk University of Foreign Studies, Korea 6th Of March 2014 2 / 01: Scientific and Business Context Scientific and Business Context 3 / Context – IoT and WoT gather more and more devices IoT boom: u Since 2007: more devices than people are connected to Internet (Cisco IoT IBSG, 2011) u In 2020: 50 billions devices will be connected to Internet (Ericson, 2010) u In 2020: the global M2M business (large industry, solution providers, connectivity providers) will reach 260 milliards Euros (Machina Research, 2012); u By 2020: IoT will add $1,9 trillion to the global economy (Gartner, 2013) => huge business application development (WoT & Future Internet boom) People connected to Internet resulted in Web 1.0, 2.0, 3.0 … applications What can we imagine about the future of the connected devices? 4 / Context – status of IoT and WoT business Huge deployment of smart devices and sensors, resulting in huge amount of data collected, not exploited in real-time, nor outside a closed system: u Smart metering => filtered data is selected for billing purposes, and various statistic analysis are accomplished £ If a third party (e.g. insurance company) is interested in specific data, no legal framework and no technical support u Smart homes: each equipment is able to switch in secure mode, and to send information or alarm messages, eventually to receive remote control commands £ France: government investment in “sensing” the elder people homes
    [Show full text]
  • Hypermedia Apis for Sensor Data: a Pragmatic Approach to the Web of Things
    Hypermedia APIs for Sensor Data: A pragmatic approach to the Web of Things The MIT Faculty has made this article openly available. Please share how this access benefits you. Your story matters. Citation Russell, Spencer, and Joseph Paradiso. “Hypermedia APIs for Sensor Data: A Pragmatic Approach to the Web of Things.” Proceedings of the 11th International Conference on Mobile and Ubiquitous Systems: Computing, Networking and Services (2014). As Published http://dx.doi.org/10.4108/icst.mobiquitous.2014.258072 Publisher European Union Digital Library/ICST Version Author's final manuscript Citable link http://hdl.handle.net/1721.1/103763 Terms of Use Creative Commons Attribution-Noncommercial-Share Alike Detailed Terms http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-sa/4.0/ Hypermedia APIs for Sensor Data A pragmatic approach to the Web of Things Spencer Russell Joseph A. Paradiso [email protected] [email protected] Responsive Environments Group MIT Media Lab Massachusetts Institute of Technology Cambridge, MA, USA ABSTRACT dards and protocols such as AllJoyn1 and MQTT2, other As our world becomes more instrumented, sensors are ap- projects [20] seek to use existing application-level Web stan- pearing in our homes, cars, and on our bodies [12]. These dards such as HTTP to provide an interface that is more sensors are connected to a diverse set of systems and pro- familiar to developers, and also that can take advantage of tocols driven by cost, power, bandwidth, and more. De- tooling and infrastructure already in place for the World spite this heterogeneous infrastructure, we need to be able Wide Web. These efforts are often dubbed the Web of to build applications that use that data, and the most value Things, which reflects the relationships to existing Web stan- comes from integrating these disparate sources together.
    [Show full text]
  • Smart Homes and the New White Futurism
    Journal of Futures Studies 2021,Vol. 25(4) 45–56 DOI: 10.6531/JFS.202106_25(4).0004 Article Smart Homes and the New White Futurism Adam Richard Rottinghaus1,* 1Assistant Professor of Media, Journalism & Film, Miami University, Williams Hall, 208, 350 Oak Ave., Oxford, OH, 45056, USA Abstract This article explores the consumer technology industry’s discourse about emerging Internet of Things smart home devices and sketches an outline of a “new white futurism.” New white futurism displaces prior consumer fantasies of labor-free living in smart homes and frames emerging smart home devices as tools for data-driven management of work/life balance in contemporary heteronormative, white, middle-class culture. The research draws on existing scholarly literature, archival documents, contemporary marketing discourses, and participant observation at CES in 2014 and 2018. The article concludes that it is crucial to reimagine cultural relationships to emerging technologies through Afro, Indigenous, and queer futuristic thought. Keywords Smart Homes, Emerging Technologies, Internet of Things, Futurism, Labor, Corporate Power This article explores the consumer technology industry’s discourse about emerging smart home devices and begins sketching the outlines of a “new white futurism.” New white futurism is a discourse from companies that promotes emerging smart home technologies as tools for data-driven management of work/life balance in contemporary heteronormative, white, middle-class culture. Since 2008 the consumer technology industry has increasingly focused on the Internet of Things (IoT) and connected smart homes as the dominant retail application. IoT smart home devices have precipitated a shift away from promoting imaginative technological futures that bring about changes in labor or culture in everyday life toward one of logistics and management that reproduce the status quo.
    [Show full text]
  • Better Life with Smart Media & Things
    Better Life with Smart media & things Innopia Technologies Inc. Why Smart Media Gateway for IoT Service? 1 Interactive media consumption with IoT devices 2 More effective information on TV interface 3 Always connected gateway at living room AllSeen Alliance Ecosystem LG AT&T Panasonic Microsoft Vodafone Technicolor Qualcomm Century Link Philips ADT Sony LGU+ Canon Haier Solution Service Operators CE Manufacturer Why Innopia for AllJoyn Solution? Specialty of Embedded Design House SW for Linux & Android experiences with platform various SoC Guaranteed Inter- Make media as one of operability with strong IoT smart home service expertise in HW & SW Innopia Advantages Innopia AllJoyn enabled product roadmap 1. AllJoyn 3. AllJoyn notification, 5. AllJoyn support Wi-Fi notification enabled control panel enabled Smart radar tracer for Smart TV wireless TV the multiple movement enablement stick streaming projector and presence monitoring MP CS CS Dev. Plan. 2. Smart home package 4. Multi-protocol including Wi-Fi power support smart media plug, Wi-Fi LED bulb and GW based on own GW stick based on AllJoyn bridge system AllJoyn framework for for AllJoyn control panel home automation, energy management with media entertainment Now Launching Launching Launching Launching available Q3, 2015 Q3, 2015 Q4, 2015 Q2, 2016 Smart Home Starter Package Wi-Fi Smart LED MagicCast Wi-Fi Smart Light Bulb - AllJoyn Gateway Power Plug Smart Media Service Use Cases 1 Interactive game with LED bulb 2 Home theater experience from media mode Smart Media Service Use Cases
    [Show full text]
  • Valorising the Iot Databox: Creating Value for Everyone Charith Perera1*, Susan Y
    TRANSACTIONS ON EMERGING TELECOMMUNICATIONS TECHNOLOGIES Trans. Emerging Tel. Tech. 2017; 28:e3125 Published online 11 November 2016 in Wiley Online Library (wileyonlinelibrary.com). DOI: 10.1002/ett.3125 RESEARCH ARTICLE Valorising the IoT Databox: creating value for everyone Charith Perera1*, Susan Y. L. Wakenshaw2, Tim Baarslag3, Hamed Haddadi4, Arosha K. Bandara1, Richard Mortier5, Andy Crabtree6, Irene C. L. Ng2, Derek McAuley6 and Jon Crowcroft5 1 School of Computing and Communications, The Open University, Walton Hall, Milton Keynes MK7 6AA, UK 2 Warwick Manufacturing Group, University of Warwick, Coventry CV4 7AL, UK 3 University of Southampton, Southampton SO17 1BJ, UK 4 School of Electronic Engineering and Computer Science, Queen Mary University of London, Mile End Road, London E1 4NS, UK 5 Computer Laboratory, University of Cambridge, Cambridge CB3 0FD, UK 6 School of Computer Science, University of Nottingham, Jubilee Campus, Nottingham NG8 1BB, UK ABSTRACT The Internet of Things is expected to generate large amounts of heterogeneous data from diverse sources including physical sensors, user devices and social media platforms. Over the last few years, significant attention has been focused on personal data, particularly data generated by smart wearable and smart home devices. Making personal data available for access and trade is expected to become a part of the data-driven digital economy. In this position paper, we review the research challenges in building personal Databoxes that hold personal data and enable data access by other parties and potentially thus sharing of data with other parties. These Databoxes are expected to become a core part of future data marketplaces. Copyright © 2016 The Authors Transactions on Emerging Telecommunications Technologies Published by John Wiley & Sons, Ltd.
    [Show full text]
  • Demystifying Internet of Things Security Successful Iot Device/Edge and Platform Security Deployment — Sunil Cheruvu Anil Kumar Ned Smith David M
    Demystifying Internet of Things Security Successful IoT Device/Edge and Platform Security Deployment — Sunil Cheruvu Anil Kumar Ned Smith David M. Wheeler Demystifying Internet of Things Security Successful IoT Device/Edge and Platform Security Deployment Sunil Cheruvu Anil Kumar Ned Smith David M. Wheeler Demystifying Internet of Things Security: Successful IoT Device/Edge and Platform Security Deployment Sunil Cheruvu Anil Kumar Chandler, AZ, USA Chandler, AZ, USA Ned Smith David M. Wheeler Beaverton, OR, USA Gilbert, AZ, USA ISBN-13 (pbk): 978-1-4842-2895-1 ISBN-13 (electronic): 978-1-4842-2896-8 https://doi.org/10.1007/978-1-4842-2896-8 Copyright © 2020 by The Editor(s) (if applicable) and The Author(s) This work is subject to copyright. All rights are reserved by the Publisher, whether the whole or part of the material is concerned, specifically the rights of translation, reprinting, reuse of illustrations, recitation, broadcasting, reproduction on microfilms or in any other physical way, and transmission or information storage and retrieval, electronic adaptation, computer software, or by similar or dissimilar methodology now known or hereafter developed. Open Access This book is licensed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/), which permits use, sharing, adaptation, distribution and reproduction in any medium or format, as long as you give appropriate credit to the original author(s) and the source, provide a link to the Creative Commons license and indicate if changes were made. The images or other third party material in this book are included in the book’s Creative Commons license, unless indicated otherwise in a credit line to the material.
    [Show full text]
  • Iotivity and Iotivity-Lite • Resources for Getting Started
    Overview of IoTivity Projects Kishen Maloor, Intel June 2018 Agenda • What is IoTivity? • Structure of an OCF implementation • IoTivity and IoTivity-Lite • Resources for getting started 2 What is IoTivity? • Umbrella of projects for building IoT devices • Open-source, reference implementations of OCF specifications • Serve as starting point for developing and certifying OCF products Specifications Vertical Data Models Device Certification Strategy, Marketing Independent governance with coordinated efforts 3 Structure of an OCF implementation User space IoT Applications Outer functional blocks APIs & Language Security Manage on-boarding, Bindings Provisioning Provisioning credentials, Infrastructure Access-control lists OCF Resource Model Resource directory, Device High-level Services Wi-Fi Easy Setup, etc. Stack Security Flows Bridging to other Zigbee, Z-Wave, etc. IP Connectivity ecosystems Kernel space Network Interfaces OS & Kernel 4 IoTivity and IoTivity-Lite • IoTivity • Suitable only for more capable device classes • Runs on Linux, Windows, Android, macOS • Multiple language bindings: C, C++, Java, Node.js • IoTivity-Lite (formerly called IoTivity-Constrained) • Lightweight implementation of OCF specifications • Suitable for all device classes (including few constrained devices) • Runs on Linux, Windows, macOS, and multiple RTOSes • C APIs only 5 IoTivity Directory Structure auto_build.py NOTICE.md auto_build.sh plugins bridging prep.sh build_common README-building-and-running-remote-access-sample.txt cloud README.md CONTRIBUTING.md
    [Show full text]
  • A Systematic Survey of Firmware Extraction Techniques for Iot Devices
    Breaking all the Things | A Systematic Survey of Firmware Extraction Techniques for IoT Devices Sebastian Vasile, David Oswald, and Tom Chothia University of Birmingham [email protected], [email protected], [email protected] Abstract. In this paper, we systematically review and categorize differ- ent hardware-based firmware extraction techniques, using 24 examples of real, wide-spread products, e.g. smart voice assistants (in particular Amazon Echo devices), alarm and access control systems, as well as home automation devices. We show that in over 45% of the cases, an exposed UART interface is sufficient to obtain a firmware dump, while in other cases, more complicated, yet still low-cost methods (e.g. JTAG or eMMC readout) are needed. In this regard, we perform an in-depth investiga- tion of the security concept of the Amazon Echo Plus, which contains significant protection methods against hardware-level attacks. Based on the results of our study, we give recommendations for countermeasures to mitigate the respective methods. 1 Introduction Extracting the firmware from IoT devices is a crucial first step when analysing the security of such systems. From a designer's point of view, preventing the firmware from falling into the hands of an adversary is often desirable: for in- stance, to protect cryptographic keys that identify a device and to impede prod- uct counterfeit or IP theft. The large variety of IoT devices results in different approaches to firmware extraction, depending on the device in question. Past work has looked at the state of security of IoT devices, e.g.
    [Show full text]
  • 2017 Iot & Consumer Electronics Guide
    PRESENTED BY 2017 IoT & CONSUMER ELECTRONICS ELECTRONICS COOLING® GUIDE SERIES | www.electronics-cooling.com 2017 IoT & CONSUMER ELECTRONICS GUIDE www.electronics-cooling.com | 2 | Electronics Cooling® Guide 2017 IoT & CONSUMER ELECTRONICS GUIDE TABLE OF CONTENTS Product Matrix (Thermal Management Manufacturers) 6 Product Selector 8 Electronics Cooling of Humans 10 MP DIVAKAR, PHD Technical Editor, Electronics Cooling Thermal Management in 12 Consumer-Grade Digital Cameras MP DIVAKAR, PHD Technical Editor, Electronics Cooling Thermal Management-Enabled 14 Products at CES 2017 MP DIVAKAR, PHD Technical Editor, Electronics Cooling Thermal Management of IoT 19 Hardware: Gateways MP DIVAKAR, PHD Technical Editor, Electronics Cooling Inductive Wireless Charging is 23 Now a Thermal Design Problem DR. VINIT SINGH NuCurrent, CTO REFERENCE SECTION Ecosystems 28 Overview of Components of 29 IoT & Consumer Electronics Products Design Aids & Tools 32 Calculations 33 Index of Advertisers 34 www.electronics-cooling.com | 3 | Electronics Cooling® Guide FOREWARD In this inaugural issue of Electronics Cooling®’s series of digital guides, IoT & Consumer Electronics, we seek to sup- ply you with the latest in thermal management of consumer electronics and the Internet of Things. The intent of these digital guides is to bring you a collection of articles and information on thermal management ma- terials. This issue features a brief description of the ecosystem for thermal management products, an overview of thermal management challenges, and some high-level descriptions of thermal design elements. We also feature more in-depth coverage in longer articles on select products. There are many unique challenges that every thermal management professional has to address with respect to IoT and Consumer Electronics products.
    [Show full text]
  • Krawetz, Neal
    Response to DoC NTIA RFC No. 160331306­6306­01 Page 1 of 23 Response to the Department of Commerce National Telecommunications and Information Administration Request for Comment on Internet of Things The Benefits, Challenges, and Potential Roles for the Government in Fostering the Advancement of the Internet of Things RFC No. 160331306‐6306‐01 May 22, 2016 Neal Krawetz, Eric Schultz, Valerie Kaminsky, Bill Tucker, et al. Response to DoC NTIA RFC No. 160331306­6306­01 Page 2 of 23 The Department of Commerce (DoC) National Telecommunications and Information Administration (NTIA) issued a Request for Comments (RFC) in the Federal Register.1 This issuance requested feedback on the current policy and technological landscape related to the Internet of Things (IoT). This document includes responses to the following items: IoT Challenges Software Patches Unsupported Devices Personal Information Recycling and Safe Disposal Disposable Electronics Insecure Design Inherent Vulnerabilities Intentional Backdoors Network and Infrastructure Economic Impact Industry Recommendations Governmental Role Current Government Policies Recommended Government Policies Proposed Role for NTIA Contributors IoT Challenges Issue #1 in the NTIA RFC requested information related to the challenges and opportunities arising from IoT. In particular, how they are similar to existing challenges and what aspects are novel. This topic is further discussed in other issues, including #6 (technological issues), #16 (cybersecurity), and #17 (privacy). The challenges posed by the Internet of Things mirrors today’s existing issues with mobile devices in regards to security, application, and networking. However, the IoT amplifies all of these issues and brings them to a critical level. The IoT is positioned to become invasive and integral to businesses and consumers across America.
    [Show full text]
  • Google Onhub
    built for User Guide OnHub REV1.0.1 1910011984 COPYRIGHT & TRADEMARKS Specifications are subject to change without notice. TP-Link is a registered trademark of TP-Link Technologies Co., Ltd. Google, Google On, OnHub and other trademarks are owned by Google Inc. Other brands and product names are trademarks of their respective holders. Copyright © 2016 TP-Link Technologies Co., Ltd. All rights reserved. http://www.tp-link.com 1 FCC STATEMENT This equipment has been tested and found to comply with the limits for a Class B digital device, pursuant to part 15 of the FCC Rules. These limits are designed to provide reasonable protection against harmful interference in a residential installation. This equipment generates, uses and can radiate radio frequency energy and, if not installed and used in accordance with the instructions, may cause harmful interference to radio communications. However, there is no guarantee that interference will not occur in a particular installation. If this equipment does cause harmful interference to radio or television reception, which can be determined by turning the equipment off and on, the user is encouraged to try to correct the interference by one or more of the following measures: • Reorient or relocate the receiving antenna. • Increase the separation between the equipment and receiver. • Connect the equipment into an outlet on a circuit different from that to which the receiver is connected. • Consult the dealer or an experienced radio/ TV technician for help. This device complies with part 15 of the FCC Rules. Operation is subject to the following two conditions: ） 1 This device may not cause harmful interference.
    [Show full text]
  • Iot Or Not Identifying Iot Devices in a Short Time Scale
    The Interdisciplinary Center, Herzlia Efi Arazi School of Computer Science M.Sc. program - Research Track IoT or NoT Identifying IoT Devices in a Short Time Scale by Haim Levy M.Sc. dissertation, submitted in partial fulfillment of the requirements for the M.Sc. degree, research track, School of Computer Science The Interdisciplinary Center, Herzliya April 2020 This work was carried out under the supervision of Prof. Anat Bremlar- Barr and the assistance of Prof. Zohar Yakhini from the Efi Arazi School of Computer Science, The Interdisciplinary Center, Herzliya. Abstract In recent years the number of IoT devices in home networks has increased dra- matically. Whenever a new device connects to the network, it must be quickly managed and secured using the relevant security mechanism or QoS policy. Thus a key challenge is to distinguish between IoT and NoT devices in a matter of min- utes. Unfortunately, there is no clear indication of whether a device in a network is an IoT. In this paper, we propose different classifiers that identify a device as IoT or non-IoT, in a short time scale, and with high accuracy. Our classifiers were constructed using machine learning techniques on a seen (training) dataset and were tested on an unseen (test) dataset. They successfully classified devices that were not in the seen dataset with accuracy above 95%. The first classifier is a logistic regression classifier based on traffic features. The sec- ond classifier is based on features we retrieve from DHCP packets. Finally, we present a unified classifier that leverages the advantages of the other two classi- fiers.
    [Show full text]