[libreplanet-discuss] free/secure IoT device shopping

[Daniel Pocock]

There are more and more IoT devices, such as webcams, light bulbs, home
automation controls and sensors and such things appearing.

Is anybody keeping a shortlist of those that are suitable for use in an
environment where freedom and security requirement are not laughed at?

There are four disturbing trends in this space:

- no source code

- proprietary protocols

- doing everything through a cloud server

- crowdfunding the devices, which implies some community involvement,
but only making a token effort to release the code or API and only for
the first few months

Even where source code is available, such as the Foobot[1], it appears
hard-coded (without[2] HTTPS!) to submit data to their own cloud server
and the developer API involves polling the cloud server rather than the
actual device.

Regards,

Daniel


1. https://github.com/airboxlab
2.
https://github.com/airboxlab/Firmware/blob/master/User_firmware/post.c#L156

___
libreplanet-discuss mailing list
libreplanet-discuss@libreplanet.org
https://lists.libreplanet.org/mailman/listinfo/libreplanet-discuss

Re: [libreplanet-discuss] Why medical technology often doesn't make it from drawing board to hospital

[Thomas Harding]

Why hospital doesn't fund computing researchers / research centers to make 
their tools usable daily in an hospital, instead of waiting for 
private/commercial compaignies/corporations to integrate it, most likely in a 
complete new(again) very costly equipment and not as an upgrade or maintainance?

Le 16 février 2017 12:33:42 GMT+01:00, David Hirst  a 
écrit :
>Why medical technology often doesn’t make it from drawing board to
>hospital 
>
>https://theconversation.com/why-medical-technology-often-doesnt-make-it-from
>-drawing-board-to-hospital-72981
>
>This article, published under a cc licence, so freely available,
>criticises
>“free” software and not providing incentives to make it robust enough
>and
>easy enough for clinical use. The conversation is not peer-reviewed,
>but is
>a voice for academics, who are used to peer scrutiny.
>
>I do not know the field, but I can see that there is huge scope for
>tools to
>help visualisation of scans that might make them easier to interpret. 
>
>But I suspect it is a bit naïve to blame “incentives”, and it sounds a
>bit
>neolib to me. But somebody more expert in the area may have better
>grounds
>for comment.
>
>The article can have comments made about it, and I think you can be
>confident that the author will see them and respond.
>
>Regards
>
>David
>
>David Hirst
>
>Mobile:  +44 7831 405443
>
> 
>
> 
>
> 

-- 
Envoyé de mon appareil Android avec K-9 Mail. Veuillez excuser ma brièveté.___
libreplanet-discuss mailing list
libreplanet-discuss@libreplanet.org
https://lists.libreplanet.org/mailman/listinfo/libreplanet-discuss