[Embedlets-dev] Re: X10 & JXME security

[Ted K. <tk...@ya...>]

Jac wrote:

>>It seems to me that simply
>>signing the messages would be sufficient.
> 
> How would you like it when other people start switching the lights on and 
> off in the room you're in? At least some kind of validation to make sure 
> you're entitled to change the state of any X10 device would be a 
> requirement for me.
> Not having some kind of authorisation would be a show stopper for the 
> implementation of this in my office environment. I don't fancy working 
> while the lights switch on and off at random.

But, if the messages were digitally signed, then only those messages signed by
an authorized entity (our cell phone) would be considered valid.

Since signing a message is easier to do than encrypting it, and since the
content of the messages should never contain sensitive information, we should
be able to get by with just signing the messages.

It appears that solving the secure remote Home Automation problem might take
less effort than expected.


Ted

__________________________________
Do you Yahoo!?
Protect your identity with Yahoo! Mail AddressGuard
http://antispam.yahoo.com/whatsnewfree