/lm.png
IoT Advisor and Developer helping SMB companies create enterprise-grade solutions.
I provide AGREED VALUE in a DEFINED TIMEFRAME for the FIXED PRICE under CLEAR CONDITIONS.
Sign up for news about my content! (by subscribing you accept the privacy policy)
    /posts/iot_vas/iot_vas.png

    IoT is a Value-Added Service (VAS)

    Iot
    The Internet of Things is a Value-Added Service (VAS), not an independent service. Recently I heard people saying that IoT is not an industry. Some generic IoT Platforms were discontinued. In my opinion, IoT is not diminishing, it is evolving. And I am not talking about the technology itself, but about our attitude toward it. The Internet of Things is not the final product or service. No one needs a connected “box” in their home, we need “washing machines”.
    /posts/feedback_loop/feedback_loop.png

    At a minimum, IoT is a feedback loop for your product.

    Iot
    At a minimum, IoT is a feedback loop for your product. That is the “quickest win” of the Internet of Things initiative I can think of. You can enable the feedback loop by attaching the telemetry communication capabilities to your existing product. This way you can take a small step towards making your product “smart”. To be honest, sending telemetry data does not make your product “smart” - it enables a better understanding of how users are interacting with your product and implementing improvements based on gathered data.
    /posts/learn_iot/learn_iot_device_title.png

    Which device is best to learn about IoT?

    Which device is the best to learn about the Internet of Things? That is a question I am asked frequently. Let me explain my perspective before answering that question. In my opinion, the Internet of Things is not a “single device”. I think about the IoT as an ecosystem of various connected devices cooperating to achieve a business outcome. Those devices are connected to diverse private and public networks and use various communication protocols.
    /posts/iot_policy/iot_policy_limit.png

    A hard limit of AWS IoT Policy worth remembering.

    Aws Iot
    I am a huge fan of using precise AWS IoT Policies. To make them flexible yet restrictive I heavily use the IoT Policy Variables. Unfortunately, putting all of those best practices in place lead to: ❌ Deployment failed: Error: Stack Deployments Failed: Error: The stack named GGMainInfra failed creation, it may need to be manually deleted from the AWS console: ROLLBACK_COMPLETE: Resource handler returned message: "Invalid request provided: Policy cannot be created - size exceeds hard limit (2048)
    /posts/password_vs_certificate/password_vs_certificate.png

    Why passwords are not equivalent to X.509 Certificates for IoT Devices?

    Iot Security
    Why Passwords are not equivalent to X.509 Certificates for IoT Devices? A Password is just a string of characters. It does not provide any information about the user - the User <-> Password relation is stored in some external system, it is not “embedded” into the password itself. A Password does not have any information about the expiry date. Once again, the expiry date is stored in some external system, it is not “embedded” into the password itself.
    /posts/ggv2_components/ggv2_mandatory_component.png

    The most important Greengrass Component for production deployment.

    Aws Iot Greengrass
    AWS IoT Greengrass is an open source Internet of Things edge runtime that can be installed on a hardware device. Greengrass Components are applications running on a Greengrass device. There are many Components, some provided by AWS, others created by independent developers. If there are so many Greengrass Components, then which of them is the most important? In my opinion, the most important Greengrass Component for production deployment is the aws.