On 10/14/14 2:20 PM, Phillip Hallam-Baker wrote:
On Tue, Oct 14, 2014 at 4:53 PM, Jim Gettys <jg(_at_)freedesktop(_dot_)org>
wrote:
On Tue, Oct 14, 2014 at 4:44 PM, Phillip Hallam-Baker
<phill(_at_)hallambaker(_dot_)com> wrote:
There are few network connected devices "simple enough to not need
updates", IMHO. Distinguishing those that do from those that don't
is just about impossible.
Courtesy of Moore's law, even "simple" devices are often/usually
based on millions of lines of code.
There are IP network devices and serial bus devices. I would like a
mechanism that would allow us to bring serial bus devices into the
Internet of things architecture without putting IP on them.
I think I could write a formal model of IP and prove an IPstack
correct. I certainly would not want to though. And I certainly don't
think I could go much more complex.
The sort of things I think need to be network addressable but not
updatable are things like temperature sensor drivers, motor speed
controllers, PID controllers and the like.
There are whole clases of the devices that I in fact cannot trust in
some cases if they are up datable.
That would include things like the code blocks of some kind of HSM,
hardware RNGs, identity tokens
Becomes suspect, means destroy it in those cases. one hopes that in
general these devices are discrete enough to be replaceable in the
context in which they are used.
My car has 30 computers in it (and a newer model would likely
have 60). There is one on every wheel counting the rotations for
the ABS system. Do I really want them all to be updatable?
I think those devices just emit signals, and we don't "talk" to
them. I can see sensors just being "output only" devices (though
that creates a different problem: network pollution.
A light switch is a writable device.
signature.asc
Description: OpenPGP digital signature