A blog about embedded computing systems, cyber-physical systems, and Internet of Things. We concentrate on technical topics but also discuss their implications.
Showing posts with label embedded. Show all posts
Showing posts with label embedded. Show all posts
Friday, October 13, 2017
Power Consumption of Autonomous Vehicles
Extremetech reports here on the power requirements of autonomous driving systems.
Thursday, October 12, 2017
Autonomous Vehicle Test Track
NBC reports here on the Mcity autonomous vehicle test track at the University of Michigan.
Friday, October 6, 2017
AMD Embedded Radeon GPU
Anandtech reports here on the new Polaris-based embedded Radeon processor from AMD.
Monday, September 25, 2017
Report on GPS Spoofing
Bruce Schneier reports here on apparent incidents of GPS spoofing. GPS spoofing creates concerns for both safety and security.
Thursday, September 7, 2017
Qualcomm V2X Chip
Extremetech reports here on a new cellular-based vehicle-to-everything chip from Qualcomm.
Tuesday, August 1, 2017
Aviation Software
This is a screenshot of the entertainment system rebooting at the start of a recent flight. Guess what OS they run?
Friday, July 21, 2017
Incompatibility in Leica Camera Equipment
DP Review reports here on an incompatibility between a Leica camera and a Leica viewfinder. Attaching the viewfinder may cause the camera to stop functioning.
Thursday, July 20, 2017
Movidius Neural Compute Stick
Anandtech reports here on the Movidius Neural Compute Stick from Intel. A Caffe convolutional neural network can be compiled onto the Movidius stick for execution. The stick interfaces to the host via USB.
Thursday, March 2, 2017
IoT Shoes That Order Pizza
AV Club reports here on special Pizza Hut shoes with a pizza ordering button. The report does not the wireless protocol used or the power consumption of the device.
Thursday, November 24, 2016
News on Schiaparelli Mars lander failure
Aviation Week reports here on news regarding the failure of the ESA Schiaparelli Mars lander. They believe that the Inertial Measurement Unit saturated, leading to a bad altitude estimate and premature initiation of the landing sequence.
Friday, November 18, 2016
Do Export Controls on Computer Security Make Us Less Secure?
This post's title is posed as a question, not as a declaration, as is the post itself. But I think that recent events highlight a conundrum in embedded system security that has been brewing for quite some time: our embedded devices can be used to attack our own computer systems.
<p>
The recent DDOS attacks against DNS provider Dyn were conducted by an army of zombie IoT devices. IoT devices, simple as they are, have enough capability to play roles in these sorts of attacks. And given that we have many more IoT devices than desktop or laptop computers, they are obvious fodder for attackers.
<p>
It is certainly true that many IoT devices are shoddily designed and constructed, making it easy for attackers to commandeer them. Some simple steps on the part of manufacturers could make these devices more secure. But it is also true that U. S. export control laws make it difficult to export security-related hardware and software that would allow an extra level of protection for these devices. And the vast majority of these inexpensive IoT devices are manufactured overseas.
<p>
If we allowed more computer security equipment to be exported, would it be used against us? Probably. Would the net threat be larger than the one we now face? I really don't know but I think we should have this discussion. I think that Congress and technical experts should work together to identify ways to make the United States and the world safer and more secure from IoT-based threats. Everyone should consider guidelines or regulations on how devices are certified at a given level of safety. As part of that process, we will probably end up considering what types of security devices, both hardware and software, we want to see more broadly used and what techniques we want to keep in reserve. An ounce of prevention is worth a pound of cure.
<p>
The recent DDOS attacks against DNS provider Dyn were conducted by an army of zombie IoT devices. IoT devices, simple as they are, have enough capability to play roles in these sorts of attacks. And given that we have many more IoT devices than desktop or laptop computers, they are obvious fodder for attackers.
<p>
It is certainly true that many IoT devices are shoddily designed and constructed, making it easy for attackers to commandeer them. Some simple steps on the part of manufacturers could make these devices more secure. But it is also true that U. S. export control laws make it difficult to export security-related hardware and software that would allow an extra level of protection for these devices. And the vast majority of these inexpensive IoT devices are manufactured overseas.
<p>
If we allowed more computer security equipment to be exported, would it be used against us? Probably. Would the net threat be larger than the one we now face? I really don't know but I think we should have this discussion. I think that Congress and technical experts should work together to identify ways to make the United States and the world safer and more secure from IoT-based threats. Everyone should consider guidelines or regulations on how devices are certified at a given level of safety. As part of that process, we will probably end up considering what types of security devices, both hardware and software, we want to see more broadly used and what techniques we want to keep in reserve. An ounce of prevention is worth a pound of cure.
Monday, August 8, 2016
Basis Peak Recall
Intel reports here that they are recalling all Basis Peak recall due to overheating of a small number of watches. A few users reported burns due to watch overheating.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
