back to article Bluetooth direct to the internet: What could possibly go wrong?

The Bluetooth special interest group (SIG) reckons connecting "things" to PCs and smartphones is passé and wants to add direct-to-router connections to its technology. It's published a guide to using a bunch of RESTful APIs to build a gateway between Bluetooth and IP networking without an intermediary device. Explaining its …

  1. frank ly

    Not going anywhere near my home

    Or anywhere I'm responsible for safety/security.

  2. hplasm
    Facepalm

    Bluetooth to Internet...

    A giant catflap in the blast doors.

    1. Synonymous Howard

      Re: Bluetooth to Internet...

      It is not though is it .. it is bluetooth to a local 'hub' and then onwards to the internet. The 'hub' /should/ have the access and encryption controls for both the internal and external use.

      The biggest issue with IoT (aside from 'why') is not the comms/protocols .. it is the secure updating/patching of code/firmware. An IoT device needs a secure boot, program code and comms stack with appropriate 'over the air' joining/synchronizing with local hubs and patching.

      My view is to use the unix approach of small inter-connectable tools .. i.e. the 'hub' has all the 'smart' elements and the IoT devices are extremely 'dumb' and perform simple functions (turn on/off, measure temp etc) as directed by the hub.

      1. Anonymous Coward
        Anonymous Coward

        Re: Bluetooth to Internet...

        Same view here. Heck, it'd be the work of an hour to create a hub here using my Intel Galileo which has both 802.11ac and Bluetooth. Now the secure part requires some thought, especially if webified although many a computer and/or game machine has both and it's trivial to create bridges on them. I'm actually surprised that this has taken so long to be granted a blessing.

  3. Yugguy

    Bluetooth will always be handy

    For quick and easy point to point comms with simple devices. Playing your phone music on bluetooth speakers for instance. Sticking those speakers on wireless would just suck bandwidth for no reason.

    1. Mage Silver badge
      Facepalm

      Re: Bluetooth will always be handy

      Bluetooth IS wireless, it's same 2.4GHz band. It can reduce speed of WiFI as the S/N is then worse for wifi.

      Simplest is a 3.5mm stereo jack. Though Apple wants to abolish it so that they can charge more for earphones, even though there are stereo bluetooth earphones already. Bluetooth means re-encoding the audio, so in theory it's lower quality than a 3.5mm jack analogue connection.

      It's true that the only advantages (especially for intermittent and low data rate gadgets) of Bluetooth over WiFi is the simple pairing (though often too simple with fixed 0000 code and poor security) and lower power (which means very short range, x10 range needs x100 power, that's physics, nothing to do with WiFi or Bluetooth or 3G or 4G etc).

  4. Richard Jones 1
    WTF?

    Zika Virus or What?

    Has there been some mass outbreak of dumbness?

    Could this lunacy be the result of some infection with a madness agent?

    Will anyone be left sane?

    Oh and then there is the TTIP, truly madness is abroad at the moment.

  5. Pascal Monett Silver badge
    Stop

    "networking security and server deployments are out of the scope of this exercise."

    Well that's it then, we know for sure that all this IoT mania is just pie-in-the-sky thinking that is two hair widths from being as bad as a pyramid scheme.

    Go on dreaming about unicorns in fairy land, guys, I'm sure you're having loads of fun with all that LSD.

    Meanwhile, here in the dark, dank underground of the Real World, you try shovelling that crap at me and you'll get a kick in the head.

    1. Anonymous Coward
      Joke

      Re: "networking security and server deployments are out of the scope of this exercise."

      "networking security and server deployments are out of the scope of this exercise."

      That would be the hard bits then. Like designing a mission to Mars, only leaving out the survival capsule and the heavy lifter rocket.

      "the organisation says people want to monitor things like home automation and alarms while they're on the move"

      Yes, it would be helpfull if we knew when you weren't at home before breaking in, signed: A. Burgler

  6. Synonymous Howard

    My heating system control uses Bluetooth

    My 'diy' arduino based heating system controller currently uses bluetooth (non-LE) to connect to my raspberry pi 'hub' as a serial device 'coz it was simplest to setup at the time. If I was redoing it I would use an ESP8266 and therefore move to a dedicated wifi vlan with additional layers of encryption and strong authentication (WPA2 + SSL + client certs) but /only/ if I could /not/ use a wired connection using structured cabling.

    Bluetooth v4 LE is clearly an option for battery powered IoT end-points and also has the 'advantage' of a typically limited range to help with physical security ... so it seems reasonable to have a mix of comms technologies available.

    Bluetooth appears more secure, by default, than 433/868Mhz RF comms and so I would certainly prefer to use that given how much easier these days it is to integrate in devices.

    1. TeeCee Gold badge
      Paris Hilton

      Re: My heating system control uses Bluetooth

      ....also has the 'advantage' of a typically limited range to help with physical security....

      A very similar approach to security as that adopted by the Ostrich. IIRC the range of NFC is supposed to be in the centimetres and hackers have already got to the state of being able to interrogate NFC enabled stuff at 25 metres. I wouldn't be at all surprised to find that Bluetooth's possible range can be waaaay more than advertised with suitable kit.

      Paris. Another well-known flightless bird.

    2. Mage Silver badge

      Re: 433/868Mhz RF comms

      They are just ASK/OOK slow speed physical links. Lowest level. You put whatever security you want on the TTL serial pins. It's trivial even with a PIC to have a CRC and 256 bit encryption, as the maximum data rate is probably about 1kbps to 10kbps at physical layer, certainly less than 50K. The TTL Serial data needs to be Manchester encoded as the links don't work well with a DC component. Trivial. Some receivers are optimised for Manchester encoding between 30kHz and 45kHz due to the AC band pass filter on the baseband of the receiver. They are really really cheap and easy to get CE approval as SRD. The USA band is at I think 385MHz rather than the European 433 MHz SRD allocation which is slap bang in middle of USA and Europe 70cm Amateur band. The EU 864 MHz SRD band can be less interference, it's wider, so supports up to about 1Mbps simple OOK/ASK or PSK and maybe 16Mbps very short range using QAM.

  7. Potemkine Silver badge

    Idiots are taking over

    'nuf said

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