back to article Microsoft emits code for DIY Linux IoT hubs. Repeat, Linux IoT hubs (that talk to Azure, duh)

Microsoft has wheeled out open-source software that wrangles Internet of Things devices and beams data to and from Azure. It's a stack of code that runs on hubs and gateways that sit between small IoT gizmos and backend services hosted in Redmond's cloud. It basically lures engineers and techies into Azure. Announced during …

  1. Anonymous Coward
    Anonymous Coward

    It's a trap!

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

  2. HAL-9000

    Where is this going

    It'll all end badly, I'm certain. I'd love to think redmonds' intentions toward linux are benign, but their past/history indicates otherwise.

  3. fidodogbreath

    It's too hefty to run on a bog-standard IoT sensor or controller

    It ran fine until they added the telemetry...

    1. bombastic bob Silver badge
      Unhappy

      It's too hefty to run on a bog-standard IoT sensor or controller

      yeah, about that...

      there are a number of microcontroller CPUs and hybrid devices (i.e. wifi device that can be programmed to read sensors) out there that are incapable of running Linux, but have an RTOS or 'giant loop' or some similar control mechanism, as the article already mentions, devices that are WiFi or ethernet capable, but would NEVER be able to run Linux.

      Keep in mind that an RPi is less focused on the flexible use of GPIO pins than is an Arduino. The beauty of the RPi is its overall versatility AND ability to run an OS like Linux. But it lacks a wider range of I/O pin modes (especially lacking a built-in A:D converter) that is more likely to be present on a dedicated microcontroller CPU (some of which are also ARM-based like the SAM series, just saying).

      So this "new, shiny" Linux-based thing from Microsoft has very limited application in the real world.

      They would've been better to provide a simple Azure hook for an Arduino sketch for device developers to use. But then nobody would use it, probably. Or they might use it for something else like AWS.

      This also doesn't address the issues of security for these "bog-standard IoT sensors" either, assuming they get connected through some "new shiny Microsoft Linux" hub. Some kind of cert would be needed for a device that directly uses a cloud service, and it would have to be 'virtually impossible' to fake/clone the auth key or cert on another device, for it to be any good.

      A generic library to handle THAT would be very very very useful. Something that would fit on an Arduino with only 32K NVRAM would be even MORE useful. Otherwise, use HTTPS and OpenSSL on Linux, meaning "full blown OS on the device" with necessary RAM and SD card image.

  4. Robert Moore
    Mushroom

    Microsoft and IoT

    If this isn't a security match made in hell, I don't know what is.

    Icon, for what I expect this will lead to.

  5. Frumious Bandersnatch

    not a bad idea, but ...

    If you can streamline the installation of a secure VPN and get caching of push data when the link is down, then the convenience factor could be worth it.

    However, this is really nothing that a moderately tech-savvy person couldn't do in an afternoon. At least the secure VPN/DMZ part, anyway. The store and forward part will depend on the particular IoT device. Most of them won't admit to this sort of configuration, although all of them should by right allow you to configure exactly where the data will be sent to, and over which network link, rather than being hard-coded to only send to a fixed server or using a proprietary protocol (making me notice that this particular offering has a whiff of embrace/extend/extinguish about it).

    Apropos of nothing, I recently lost the drive attached to the Pi that I'd been using as a music/radio player. Nothing lost since it was an old drive that I'd expected to fail. I had also been using the machine's wireless card to provide fail-over Internet access so that if my broadband went down, I could just turn on tethering on my phone and I'd be back online again. I decided to replace the Pi with an ODROID (simple) and then idly wondered about doing the fail-over on my OpenWRT router. Turns out that my wireless card can be used in both client and AP mode at the same time, so once I had that insight it took about an hour to migrate the fail-over completely onto the router. No doubt setting up a VLAN/DMZ would only take a similar amount of time.

    Now if only my ISP would support IPv6 in some way.... though I guess that would take a bit more than an afternoon to fully explore :)

  6. ForthIsNotDead

    Waste of time...

    It's nice idea. It's tempting to think that I could connect various telemetry units to a large cloud based back end, such as river flow monitors, air quality monitors, traffic frequency analysers (those grey boxes that you see at the side of the motorway), motorway notice boards etc. However, the fact of the matter is, once these devices are installed, you generally want them to be installed and running for the next 20 years with only the occasional visit to change a battery or an I/O card.

    Having all that infrastructure depend on the trends and whims of pointy-haired twenty-somethings at Microsoft is gonna get you kicked out of the boardroom.

    What happens when they decide that their Linux based IoT thing isn't trendy anymore, or the dude that put it together at Microsoft as his skunk-works lunch-time project moves on and Azure gets updated meaning your IoT/Scada/Telemetry units can't phone home anymore?

    You'd have to be nuts.

    There's a reason why these systems rely on nothing more than PSTN and GPRS and a couple of dusty servers and a rack of serial ports.

    1. John Brown (no body) Silver badge

      Re: Waste of time...

      @ ForthIsNotDead

      TL'DR version: Google Revolve.

  7. Anonymous Coward
    Anonymous Coward

    Random thoughts...

    1) They fear IoT devices data can overload clouds too?

    2) A local hub will be able to gather telemetry even when the connection is down, so you don't lose precioussss data.

    3) They can gather more data when not limited my the bandwidth available

    4) If I can process locally at the hub, why should I sent my data to the cloud? <G>

  8. Anonymous Coward
    Anonymous Coward

    IOT

    Whoever thought that having your garage door or your home thermostat on the internet was a good idea?

    *

    Recent install troubles with a Linksys ES7500 access point and router show that companies like Belkin (owner of Linksys) want their retail network equipment accessible to smartphone apps via the cloud. Why would that be?

    *

    This Microsoft suggestion smacks of the same sort of thing.

    *

    Do "ordinary users" know about this trend for corporate entities (Microsoft, Belkin, GCHQ, NSA....) to install stuff so that nothing you do (either on the internet, or even on your LAN at home)....nothing you do will even be private again?

    1. quxinot

      Re: IOT

      >Do "ordinary users" know about this trend for corporate entities (Microsoft, Belkin, GCHQ, NSA....) to install stuff so that nothing you do (either on the internet, or even on your LAN at home)....nothing you do will even be private again?

      I suspect that the people who desire these IoT things are pleased that it saves them the work of manually putting it on Facebook et al.

      Still wouldn't mind some of the devices out there, if i could connect them to my home server alone, behind pfsense and careful supervision. Of course that would mean the manufacturer could only sell the device, not the device, service, and my information, so it will never happen.

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

Other stories you might like