this post was submitted on 02 May 2024
362 points (97.6% liked)

Technology

59575 readers
3280 users here now

This is a most excellent place for technology news and articles.


Our Rules


  1. Follow the lemmy.world rules.
  2. Only tech related content.
  3. Be excellent to each another!
  4. Mod approved content bots can post up to 10 articles per day.
  5. Threads asking for personal tech support may be deleted.
  6. Politics threads may be removed.
  7. No memes allowed as posts, OK to post as comments.
  8. Only approved bots from the list below, to ask if your bot can be added please contact us.
  9. Check for duplicates before posting, duplicates may be removed

Approved Bots


founded 1 year ago
MODERATORS
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[โ€“] AbidanYre@lemmy.world 1 points 6 months ago (1 children)

Fair enough. I didn't read it as being currently maintained in your original post.

[โ€“] philpo@feddit.de 3 points 6 months ago

The thing is: The standard itself is rather well designed and didn't need too much updates (they just extended the possible packet contents in terms of possible parameters - which technically isn't that necessary as you can fall back to ASCI).

The last major updates were more towards extending functions (KNX over RF), connecting locations via IP tunnel, and securing the packets themselves (which is not really necessary for single household installations but VERY much for multi tennant installations).

The major strength of KNX is the bus packet system itself - as the packets are standardized there are only a few attack avenues. An attacker could flood the bus with packets, try to update with fraudulent code (if none did put a password on it) or try to put fraudulent content in a module that accepts ASCI packets. The problem is the access - the attacker would need physical access or the IP gateway (if existing)would need to be unsecured towards the internet... In the end it is a fairly resilient piece of software.