Ethernet question - quick one

[TrimTheKing]

What's to stop a smart home being hacked by a smart evil-doer?

Genuine question; I know nothing, plus 98% of this thread is in another language which Duolingo doesn't seem to cover.

Because a) there are not very many smart enough evil doers about, b) if they are smart they have much more profitable things to do, c) there is physical and software security, d) we are in the middle of nowhere, e) what would they gain and d) I have a gun :lol:

Must admit I was thinking more of long-distance evil-doers, who seem to have considerable time on their hands and are smart enough to think of ways to gain from such things. Given the inconvenience of having ones computer held to ransom, how much worse would it be if it was your home? Or then there's the state-sponsored evil-doer, who will do things just to be a bloody nuisance, and often seem to take a scatterbomb approach with no thought of where the fallout may occur. Stuff like that.

I think the paranoia around these things clouds the reality in many ways.

Yes these things are oft under secured, but they are connected to a Wi-Fi network in your house, which unless you're an idiot will be connected to a router provided by yourself or your ISP. That router defaults to blocking any and all inbound traffic until you make an active choice to change that.

To 'hack' a Wi-Fi device you would need to either be in Wi-Fi range of the device, or hack the wired network and control the Wi-Fi device from another machine on the network.

Now I suspect it's highly unlikely that state sponsored hackers are going to be hanging around my rural idyll, and if they were then I can't see they'd give 2 monkeys poops about hacking my light bulbs...

It's a little less simplistic than that of course, but at a high level that's about the size of it.

I have no issue with people being cautious, I am too, but in reality there are very few systems that couldn't be hacked by the nefarious should they really want to, and there's extremely little to gain by taking control of my Wi-Fi enabled coffee machine, so I'll reserve my worry for more important things in my life.

I don't mean that in a derogatory way at all, just that it's such a small possibility with such little reward for the perpetrator that the likelihood is miniscule. I'm much more likely to be a target of malware and data blackmail than my light bulbs becoming a conduit to my digital security.

On Roger's points, I'll be looking at Hue and the like because my existing Lutron system (which was in the house when we bought it and there's nothing I can do about it, and wouldn't have chosen it) is, I suspect, a massive electricity user and the cause of my monstrous bills. Because of how it works I would need a full re-wire of my entire house to take it back to 'normal' lighting.

While I have no need or desire for the colour schemes etc, the remote control would help me get around needing to rip my house to pieces to put in a 'normal' lighting system so I'll be looking at it and don't see this as either an unnecessary indulgence into 'smart' not a waste of resources. The potential savings in electricity usage over a few years would more than offset the investment of both cash and planetary resources.

The 'leakage' on the current system and the power to power the control unit etc means with not a light in the house turned on, it still costs me about £50 per month! That's just ridiculous and something I need to change!

 

[RogerS]

What's to stop a smart home being hacked by a smart evil-doer?

Genuine question; I know nothing, plus 98% of this thread is in another language which Duolingo doesn't seem to cover.

Because a) there are not very many smart enough evil doers about, b) if they are smart they have much more profitable things to do, c) there is physical and software security, d) we are in the middle of nowhere, e) what would they gain and d) I have a gun :lol:

.....

OK...just for clarification. The security or lack of of the IoT (Internet of Things), smart devices etc.

First off, there are a large number of hackers - either individual, crime-related or state-sponsored.

Second, yes they might be trying to hack your computer but probably not.

Where they could aim their attention and is an area that will screw up the internet for everyone - and I mean everyone - is to carry out a DDoS attack on the DNS servers that form the heart of the internet. Now these are protected in many ways against this sort of attack but given enough compromised IoT devices around the world then it does become a threat.

OK...one could argue that there isn't much computing power (yet) in these so-called smart devices. The emphasis is on 'yet'. Their security is notoriously poor and few have any means of updating in the future.

Am I being paranoid ? Possibly. But better to be safe than sorry.

Edit: Crossed with Trim's post. We're broadly on the same page, I think, re security.

 

[Craig Salisbury]

2 things,

1, Hue doesnt need to be internet connected, it does if you want outside of home control and auto update checking but you can turn all that off and just run it on a separate SSID without an external connection.

2. I dont know of any ISP who doesn't have very well protected DNS with Dos mitigation on their infrastructure. We certainly have, however webhosts need to pay for the service from the ISP which varies depending on solution.

 

[TrimTheKing]

Edit: Crossed with Trim's post. We're broadly on the same page, I think, re security.

Hmmm, in some ways but in many others not. To compromise an IoT device they would need to first compromise your home network, which means they're 'in' to all your devices not just your IoT devices.

In terms of DNS then your IoT devices will use your router's DNS unless you've told it not to, so that DDoS would be internal to your home initially.

You're not wrong, they are wildly differing in their security level, some being shockingly poor, but part of the reason for that is that they're banking on your home network stopping anyone getting to them, which it should, and if that's broken then all your computers are vulnerable not just your toaster.

 

[AJB Temple]

I agree Alf. However, the chips in these things do not need to connect to the internet as I am not interested in controlling my lights etc from Germany. I am no electronics person, but all that they do is act as a switch and load controller. In my case the Quinetic switches are Radio Frequency not Wi-Fi and that is a deliberate choice.

Your point Roger is one of preference. In reality most of us use mood lighting. In may parent's day they had a central ceiling pendant in each room. Now we are much more used to task lighting, which may be super bright in a work area, focussed and quite narrow beam for reading or picture lights, and so on. The main benefit of Hue to me is the controllability and longevity. You do not need to buy the expensive colour lights, but the more basic version is cheaper and it is a definite advantage to be able to control the colour temperature from say 6000K for certain tasks, to a much more mellow 3000K in seating areas. The bulbs are fully interchangeable.

I realise that internet debates rarely convince anyone to change their mind and I fully respect that your viewpoint differs from mine, In a way it's back to the original purpose of this thread, which was a query about Cat 5, 5E, 6 and 7 cables. Cat 5E would do as Mark made clear, but I opted to spend an extra £12 on external rated and protected Cat 7 to achieve some future proofing for things I am unaware of currently.

 

[AJB Temple]

I wrote the above a while ago and in the meantime Mark and others posted.

To be clear - there is zero security risk with the way I do it. The actual circuits are controlled by RF receivers and they are not connected in any way to wi-fi. You would to have a suitable RF transmitter within 30 metres of the receiver (not possible at my house without scaling fences) and even then all you could do is switch the controlled circuits either on or off. Hue (or ordinary LED bulbs if you want) is then the next layer and need not connect with any computer system you have at all.

I think Quinetic (or el cheapo Chinese copies) is very much the future for low load switched circuits of up to 16 amps. It is just so easy to install, consumes no power at all when off, and you can have up 10 switches per controller and put them anywhere you like, including a key fob. No wires. I prefer physical switches too, as does my wife. They are about £15 for a double gang one, and you can stick it or screw it to whatever you want, or just leave it by your chair.

BTW, I am with you Mark on Lutron. Crazy complex, very wasteful of electricity, super expensive and now largely redundant in any new build / renovation because of things like Quinetic and Hue et al are far more flexible and even a DIY person could install one with a little bit of learning (I am not recommending that - I have done a lot of learning this year and I have the proper test tools).

 

[RogerS]

....
You're not wrong, they are wildly differing in their security level, some being shockingly poor, but part of the reason for that is that they're banking on your home network stopping anyone getting to them, which it should, and if that's broken then all your computers are vulnerable not just your toaster.

But not if you have two routers with a DMZ between them into which you put all the weakly secured stuff

 

[RogerS]

As I said in a previous post. Quinetic is a completely different technology (and usefulness). I was a very early adopter.

 

[Windows]

I just lost a long message to this thread, so I’m going to be very brief with this one:

Hue lets you solve the problem of controlling multiple lights from one switch without changing your wiring in a way that quinetic does not. Not sure why the additional ability to control colour counts against Hue while quinetic is A-OK?

Hue still provides useful features even if you don’t connect it to the internet.

Any device you add to your network is a security risk. This includes routers, computers, phones, televisions, light bulbs, washing machines. If you don’t see the value for the internet-connected features, do not give the device access to the internet and/or don’t add it to your network.

Computer and network security is a complex topic, but it’s worth noting that JavaScript in a web page can make network requests to any machine on your network by default so a single firewall filtering incoming traffic at the router is not where it’s at security-wise.

 

[TrimTheKing]

...so a single firewall filtering incoming traffic at the router is not where it’s at security-wise.

But it's all that 99% of the country have, so it's a start. All but the very best in security solutions will be rendered inadequate by poor user behaviour.

 

[RogerS]

.....
Hue lets you solve the problem of controlling multiple lights from one switch .....

What problem ? Multiple as in how many ?

Quinetic is simply just a way to turn on a light without the hassle of a cable to the switch. The choice of lights is yours. It's an open system in that respect.

Hue is closed.

 

[AJB Temple]

What I like about Hue is that I can control from an App the light level (dimmer) and temperature (and colour for those lamps with that feature) on a light by light basis, and save this set up as a programme. Takes seconds to set up and is dead easy. So in our drawing room for example we have about 10 table and reading lights and some picture lights, and I can set a single button to do "watch a movie" light levels (dim but warm) and have different light levels across each lamp as required, and a completely different set up for say reading or entertaining guests. Each setting fully saved and easily adjusted from my phone, with the most used one just switched on an off from a roamable switch. I actually think the colour palette is very good as it happens, but is not an essential feature necessarily.

Glad you already embraced smart tech with Quinetic Roger. Did you select the wi-fi version or RF as a matter of interest?

They have recently improved the receivers quite a bit, so they now have terminal shields, hence no back box or termination box is needed. They have also provided a 16 amp option now as well which is handy.

 

[AJB Temple]

For those wondering what the Quinetic stuff looks like, here are 3 I installed earlier, above a brand new RCBO consumer unit installed yesterday in the kitchen loft space.




The Wago junction below is because Quinetic is line and neutral only, whereas the light fittings require a CPC. This will go in a junction box when the other receivers are connected as earth will feed back to the CU. I will be fitting two more receivers as well but those circuits are not run in yet. This is also the place where the Cat 7 cable will be fished through to extend my wi-fi etc.

 

[9fingers]

I'm also a Quinetic RF switch fan, Roger bought some first, sent me some and I evaluated them for my applications.
There is no security in built other than a 1 in 32000 code but neither is there a need for security.
The one nuisance is they don't have a receiver with volt free contacts and their techies don't see a need for one in the range but I do!
So I've had to modify their receivers.
Their battery less transmitters are very clever indeed and simply use energy from the click of the switch to generate enough power to send the command signal.
A truly smart solution to wireless switching.
Adrian you mentioned there might be chinese knock offs of Quinetic. do you have any links please? they might just do a volt free contact version?
Bob

 

[RogerS]

....
Glad you already embraced smart tech with Quinetic Roger. Did you select the wi-fi version or RF as a matter of interest?

...

Early adopter...the original and definitely NOT wi-fi. I also have a couple of their 16 Amp modules.

What I like about Hue is that I can control from an App the light level (dimmer) and temperature (and colour for those lamps with that feature) on a light by light basis, and save this set up as a programme. ....

I can't even begin to understand why anyone would want to do that but each to their own, I guess. We installed dimmer controls in a few rooms here. Do we ever use them ? Nope.

 

[Sheffield Tony]

The enthusiasm for technology we never knew we needed bothers me because so much electronic gear is produced and so little meaningfully recycled. Cherry picked for gold and a few other valuable bits, maybe. In the sense of leaving no harmful waste and being sustainable, no. Much of the "recycling" is more environmentally harmful than landfill. Copper cable and a switch are rather easier.

And off is truly off. Do these "smart" things actually consume no power when off ? This is tricky with RF signalling, unless you can power the receiver from the transmitted energy.

 

[AJB Temple]

My CU pic is completely upside down now. No idea how that happened.

Bob - Ener-J make a copy of the old version of Quinetic, where the green terminals are exposed. If you put Quinetic into Amazon, you get Thinkbee plus various similar iterations. These pretty much all have exposed terminations.

I buy my Quinetic stuff from TLC where I have a trade account. It is about £16 trade inc VAT for a RF receiver of latest type and similar for a 2 gang switch. A bit more for wi-fi enabled.

As you know, I don't have the electronics skills to modify the Quinetic receivers. Adrian

 

[TrimTheKing]

My CU pic is completely upside down now. No idea how that happened.

I turned it, thought that was the right way, I'll sort it now...

 

[AJB Temple]

Thanks Mark.