Internet Of Things Devices

Why is Bluetooth more common than Wi-Fi in battery-powered IoT devices? The answer is high cost and high power consumption of Wi-Fi. But why is that? Despite Wi-Fi having many advantages over Bluetooth such as higher range, significantly higher throughput, WPA3 security, and being IP addressable, Bluetooth still prevails in certain use cases. The primary reason for higher power consumption in Wi-Fi is because of the OFDM-based PHY layer, which has a high peak to average power ratio (PAPR). This leads to operating the power amplifier (PA) very inefficiently, with the PA efficiency during Wi-Fi transmission being less than 10% whereas Bluetooth PA efficiency is 50%. To transmit 1 mW Wi-Fi frame, we need to spend 10 mW of DC power, whereas to transmit 1mW Bluetooth frame, we burn only 2 mW DC power. Especially, consider the fact that after Wi-Fi 6 the number of OFDM subcarriers have quadrupled (256 subcarriers in 20 MHz bandwidth). Bluetooth on the other hand uses constant envelope modulation scheme ( papr=0 db) such as FSK. LORA, Zigbee and 802.11ad are few other standards using constant envelope modulation schemes. If only Wi-Fi had defined a constant envelope modulation PHY, the game may have been different in IoT. Another major issue is cost, and in my opinion, that is because of unnecessary baggage of features being required by IEEE and Wi-Fi alliance for certification purposes. Several Wi-Fi features are not really needed for battery powered IOT devices such as wireless door lock for example. Finally, the RX power consumption of Wi-Fi is higher owing to higher RX bandwidth, higher ADC sampling rate, and uncertainty in listen state duration owing to no guarantee service periods during power save operation. While Target Wake Time (TWT) made an attempt, it wasn’t really successful because TWT service periods are not reserved, and any client can barge into another client’s TWT service period for sending its uplink traffic. Overall, the high cost and power consumption of Wi-Fi make Bluetooth a more attractive option for battery-powered IoT devices.

ƦEGULATꞮONS OF THE ꞮNTEƦNET OF THꞮNGS by the Communications, Space & Technology Commission (CST) A comprehensive regulatory framework addressing various aspects of IoT deployment, Cybersecurity, and management was launched in August 2024. 📑 IoT Regulations Document: https://bit.ly/3SV7p4Q 🔗 𝗡𝗲𝘄𝘀: https://bit.ly/IoT_Reg Libelium, in cooperation with INCIBE - Instituto Nacional de Ciberseguridad, and the cooperation agreement with the National Cybersecurity Authority, and the #KnowledgeCommunity of the Global Cybersecurity Forum Institute led by NEOM, SITE سايت and aramco. We are working in addressing these regulations, together with the actions required for the European #NIS2 and CyberResilience Act #CRA for the IoT too. The #IoTRegulation at KSA is focused on creating a secure, reliable, and standardized environment for deploying IoT technologies within the jurisdiction, promoting investment in the context of new IoT industries such as: Alat, iot squared, and SAMI Advanced Electronics by the Public Investment Fund (PIF). 𝔻𝕒𝕥𝕒 𝕊𝕖𝕔𝕦𝕣𝕚𝕥𝕪 𝕒𝕟𝕕 ℙ𝕣𝕚𝕧𝕒𝕔𝕪: 1️⃣ IoT service providers must implement robust encryption methods and comply with national data protection laws. 2️⃣ Secure data transmitted through IoT devices. This includes ensuring that personal data is protected from unauthorized access and breaches. 3️⃣ IoT devices must comply with strict privacy regulations to safeguard user information, especially sensitive data. 𝔻𝕖𝕧𝕚𝕔𝕖 ℝ𝕖𝕘𝕚𝕤𝕥𝕣𝕒𝕥𝕚𝕠𝕟 𝕒𝕟𝕕 ℂ𝕖𝕣𝕥𝕚𝕗𝕚𝕔𝕒𝕥𝕚𝕠𝕟 1️⃣ IoT devices must be registered with the relevant authorities before being deployed in the market. This ensures that all devices meet the necessary technical and security standards. 2️⃣ Certification is required for devices to confirm compliance with established standards for the integrity and security of the IoT ecosystem. ℕ𝕖𝕥𝕨𝕠𝕣𝕜 𝕒𝕟𝕕 ℂ𝕠𝕟𝕟𝕖𝕔𝕥𝕚𝕧𝕚𝕥𝕪 𝕊𝕥𝕒𝕟𝕕𝕒𝕣𝕕𝕤: 1️⃣ IoT devices must adhere to network protocols such as #LwM2M, #MQTTS and emerging #RedCap to ensure they can operate securely and efficiently within existing networks. This includes requirements for network resilience and redundancy to minimize disruptions. #5GAdvanced #NBIoT #LoRA 2️⃣ IoT devices should be compatible with the communication standards that ensure interoperability among different devices and systems GSMA - Internet of Things. 𝕌𝕤𝕖𝕣 ℝ𝕚𝕘𝕙𝕥𝕤 𝕒𝕟𝕕 ℂ𝕠𝕟𝕤𝕖𝕟𝕥: 1️⃣ IoT users must be informed about the data collection practices and must provide explicit consent before their data is used or shared. #DataSpaces #GDPR 2️⃣ Users are granted rights to control their data, including opting out of certain data collection activities. ℂ𝕠𝕞𝕡𝕝𝕚𝕒𝕟𝕔𝕖 𝕨𝕚𝕥𝕙 ℕ𝕒𝕥𝕚𝕠𝕟𝕒𝕝 𝕒𝕟𝕕 𝕀𝕟𝕥𝕖𝕣𝕟𝕒𝕥𝕚𝕠𝕟𝕒𝕝 𝕊𝕥𝕒𝕟𝕕𝕒𝕣𝕕𝕤: 🌍 The regulation aligns with international standards, facilitating global interoperability and security. 🔎 Regular audits and assessments are required to ensure ongoing compliance.

Edge capability and conditional transmission ... How edge computing on LPWAN devices extends the battery life by factor of 4 As industrial IoT systems continue to scale across critical infrastructure—pipelines, reservoirs, remote assets, and urban utilities—one question persists across all engineering teams: "How do we make the device smarter without draining the battery faster or make the firmware more complex?" The answer is not in more power—it’s in more intelligence at the edge. > What Is #EdgeCapability in #LPWAN Devices? Edge capability refers to the ability of the device to process and analyze data locally, before deciding whether to transmit it over the network. This is a critical advancement in the design of battery-powered LPWAN devices—whether #LoRaWAN, #NB-IoT, or #LTE-M. Instead of blindly transmitting data at fixed intervals, smart edge devices evaluate conditions such as: - Threshold violations (e.g., pressure above X bar) - Anomalous patterns (e.g., sudden temperature spike) - Predictive failure signals (via trend detection) Only when action is needed, do they transmit. > Why Conditional Transmission Changes the Game Let’s take a real-world example from our deployments at Ellenex: - Scenario A: Traditional Mode Transmit every 15 minutes (fixed schedule) 96 transmissions/day Average battery life: < 1 year - Scenario B: Edge Mode with Conditional Transmission Sample every 5 minutes Transmit only when threshold conditions are met or at max once per day 1–5 transmissions/day depending on conditions Average battery life: 3.5–4 years By eliminating unnecessary network sessions, power-hungry radio activations, and overhead from MAC layer interactions, energy usage drops dramatically. > Implications for Industrial Use Cases Water Utilities can detect leaks without flooding the network with data. Smart Agriculture devices react only to critical soil moisture levels, not morning dew. Asset Monitoring for pressure, level, vibration, or flow becomes cost-effective in remote areas. And most importantly: maintenance intervals are extended dramatically. Battery replacements become rare events, not monthly line items. > What This Means for Product Designers When we design LPWAN devices at Ellenex, edge intelligence is not optional—it’s a core requirement. Every mA-hour counts. We, at Ellenex Industrial IoT, design products with: - Smart wakeup logic - Configurable edge thresholds - Modular firmware to enable OTA updates of local logic Because the edge is not just about faster insights—it’s about operational viability. Final Thought Nowadays, data is only valuable when it's actionable—and battery life is only long when data knows when not to leave the device. Edge capability + conditional transmission provides longer life, smarter systems, and scalable deployments. If you're still pushing data every 15 minutes—it is time to re-think 🤔 . #monitoring #IoT #ellenex #EdgeComputing #LPWAN #batterylife

To ensure secure IoT communications and transactions, it is essential to understand potential threats, strengthen device security, use encryption, manage identities and access, segment networks, establish security policies, and continuously assess and mitigate risks. Understanding Threats Comprehending threats such as DDoS attacks, Man-in-the-Middle (MitM) attacks, and malware infections is crucial for implementing robust cybersecurity measures to protect IoT devices and the data they handle. Strengthening Device Security Implement robust authentication mechanisms, regular security updates, and secure configurations for IoT devices to ensure that only authorized users and devices access the network and that vulnerabilities are minimized. Using Encryption Utilize encryption for data in transit with protocols like TLS, and for data at rest to ensure that sensitive information is protected from unauthorized access and interception during transmission and storage. Managing Identities and Access Implement Role-Based Access Control (RBAC) and maintain comprehensive monitoring and logging of all activities to manage user permissions and quickly detect and respond to suspicious behavior within the IoT ecosystem. Segmenting Networks Isolate IoT devices from the main network and use firewalls along with Intrusion Detection/Prevention Systems (IDS/IPS) to limit the potential impact of any security breaches, keeping the overall network secure. Establishing Security Policies Educate employees on the importance of IoT security and best practices, and have a defined incident response plan to ensure the organization is prepared to handle security threats effectively and efficiently. Continuous Risk Assessment Conduct regular risk assessments and implement a vulnerability management program to identify, evaluate, and address security weaknesses in IoT devices, maintaining a proactive security posture. #IoT #Cybersecurity #DataProtection Ring the bell to get notifications 🔔

Enhancing SCADA Security Over Long-Distance Communications Security in Industrial Control Systems (ICS): More critical than ever! In previous posts, we explored how Modbus RTU pairs with spread spectrum radios for reliable, long-distance SCADA links, alongside strategies for polling and communication. Today, let’s tackle a topic that underpins them all: Security. Why ICS Security Demands Attention Industrial Control Systems power critical infrastructure. A breach can ripple into safety, environmental, or economic crises. Wireless SCADA communications, spanning vast distances, introduce unique vulnerabilities. That’s why fortified cybersecurity is non-negotiable. The Challenges in Securing Wireless SCADA 1. Bandwidth & Latency Constraints: Adding encryption or authentication can strain limited bandwidth. Striking the right balance is key. 2. Resource-Limited Endpoints: Remote PLC/RTUs or field devices often lack the hardware for advanced security. Feasibility matters. 3. Interference & Jamming Risks: Spread spectrum helps, but intentional jamming persists. Detection tools and physical layer security are essential. 4. Long Update Cycles: Geographically dispersed assets complicate updates. Secure Over-the-Air (OTA) mechanisms are a must-have. Best Practices for a Secure SCADA Environment 1. Encryption & Authentication ---->Encrypted Data Transport: Use industry-standard encryption (e.g., AES-256) or secure VPNs. ---->Mutual Authentication: Ensure devices and servers authenticate each other to prevent spoofing. 2. Network Segmentation & Zoning ---->Defence-in-Depth: Treat wireless links as untrusted. Segment the network using ISA/IEC 62443 standards. ---->Access Controls: Limit who and what can access polling masters and remote devices. 3. Monitoring & Intrusion Detection ---->Traffic Baselines: Know what "normal" looks like. Anomaly detection tools can spot intrusions. ---->Comprehensive Logging: Maintain logs and regularly audit them to detect tampering early. 4. Physical Security Measures ---->Secure Field Installations: Use locked enclosures, tamper-evident seals, and even surveillance cameras. ---->Tamper Detection: Deploy PLC/RTUs with sensors that notify operators of unauthorized access. 5. Regular Audits & Updates ---->Security Assessments: Conduct penetration tests and tabletop exercises to expose vulnerabilities. ---->Patch Management Plans: Streamline updates with secure OTA mechanisms and contingency plans. Balancing Performance and Protection Cybersecurity in ICS is a delicate act. You’re balancing risk mitigation against SCADA’s core reliability and performance. A clear threat model is your first step to identifying vulnerabilities and tailoring cost-effective, ongoing solutions. How have you strengthened cybersecurity in your SCADA long-distance communication environment? How have you solved the challenge of patching remote endpoints? P.S. Share this post to help others in the community. ♻️ Thank you!

🔋 The Unsung Hero of IoT Devices: Power Management Done Right When discussing IoT devices, most people focus on connectivity (Wi-Fi, BLE, LoRa), sensors, and firmware features. But the factor that truly determines whether your product succeeds in the field is power management. Without it, even the most advanced design can fail. ⚡ Why Power Management Matters A typical ESP32-CAM or Wi-Fi-based IoT board can draw 120–240mA during active transmission. Without optimization, a standard Li-ion battery may last just a few hours. With sleep modes, efficient power regulation, and smart duty cycling, you can extend runtime to days, weeks, or even months depending on the use case. 👉 In IoT, battery life = product usability. 🔑 Practical Power Optimization Strategies ✅ Use Deep Sleep Aggressively Most MCUs (ESP32, STM32, RP2040) can drop to tens of µA in deep sleep. Wake up, capture data, send it, then return to sleep. ✅ Choose the Right Regulator Select low-dropout regulators (LDOs) with low quiescent current. For battery applications, a switching regulator (buck converter) often provides higher efficiency than an LDO. ✅ Design PCB for Power Efficiency Place decoupling capacitors close to high-current devices like radios and cameras. Separate analog and digital grounds to minimize noise and wasted power. ✅ Select Communication Wisely Wi-Fi: High power, short bursts — best for images or larger data packets. BLE / Zigbee / LoRa: Much lower average power — ideal for periodic sensor data. 📊 Real-World Lesson In one IoT monitoring project: Initial design (Wi-Fi + no sleep): battery drained in under a day. Optimized design (deep sleep + burst Wi-Fi + efficient regulator): runtime extended to several weeks on the same cell. That’s the difference between a prototype and a deployable solution. 🎯 Key Takeaway Power management is not an afterthought — it’s the foundation of IoT design. Great firmware and sensors don’t matter if your device shuts down after a few hours. 👉 For every IoT or embedded project, treat power as a first-class design parameter — plan for it, measure it, and optimize it. 💬 What’s the biggest challenge you’ve faced in low-power IoT design? Let’s share real-world lessons 👇 #IoT #EmbeddedSystems #PowerManagement #ESP32 #PCBDesign #LowPowerIoT #FirmwareDevelopment #ElectronicsEngineering #HardwareDesign #EmbeddedEngineering #IoTDevelopment Disclaimer:This image was generated using AI for illustrative and educational purposes only. While it represents engineering concepts at a high level, certain technical details, dimensions, or component behaviors may not be fully accurate. Always consult official datasheets, manufacturer documentation, and domain experts before making design, hardware, or firmware decisions. This content is intended to raise awareness and share general insights, not to replace professional engineering guidance.

𝗕𝗲𝘆𝗼𝗻𝗱 𝗭𝗲𝗿𝗼 𝗧𝗿𝘂𝘀𝘁: 𝗧𝗵𝗲 𝗙𝘂𝘁𝘂𝗿𝗲-𝗦𝘁𝗮𝘁𝗲 𝗦𝗲𝗰𝘂𝗿𝗶𝘁𝘆 𝗣𝗮𝗿𝗮𝗱𝗶𝗴𝗺 𝗳𝗼𝗿 𝗚𝗹𝗼𝗯𝗮𝗹 𝗘𝗻𝘁𝗲𝗿𝗽𝗿𝗶𝘀𝗲𝘀 Zero Trust has become the dominant security paradigm, yet as I've implemented it across multiple global enterprises, I've observed a fundamental limitation: it's still anchored in a perimeter mindset with more sophisticated boundaries. The future-state security paradigm must evolve beyond this approach. After collaborating with security leaders across industries, I see the emergence of "Adaptive Resilience Architecture." Instead of focusing primarily on preventing unauthorized access, this architecture accepts breach inevitability and designs for rapid reconfiguration. It combines three capabilities absent from traditional Zero Trust models: 𝟭. 𝗖𝗼𝗻𝘁𝗶𝗻𝘂𝗼𝘂𝘀 𝗕𝗲𝗵𝗮𝘃𝗶𝗼𝗿𝗮𝗹 𝗦𝗲𝗰𝘂𝗿𝗶𝘁𝘆 𝗠𝗼𝗱𝗲𝗹𝗶𝗻𝗴 Rather than static permission mapping, future security frameworks are integrating real-time behavioral analysis that can detect subtle pattern shifts even in authorized access. This helps identify compromised credentials and insider threats that pass traditional Zero Trust verification. At one financial services organization, implementing behavioral models identified 14 high-privilege accounts exhibiting anomalous patterns that perfectly matched authentication requirements but were actually compromised. 𝟮. 𝗔𝘂𝘁𝗼𝗻𝗼𝗺𝗼𝘂𝘀 𝗦𝗲𝗰𝘂𝗿𝗶𝘁𝘆 𝗥𝗲𝘀𝗽𝗼𝗻𝘀𝗲 Security architectures are evolving from alerting to autonomous response. The most mature organizations can detect, contain, and remediate threats across their infrastructure without human intervention for common attack patterns. Through autonomous security measures, one healthcare organization reduced its response time from 42 minutes to 3.8 seconds, preventing what would have been a significant data breach. 𝟯. 𝗗𝗶𝗴𝗶𝘁𝗮𝗹 𝗦𝘂𝗽𝗽𝗹𝘆 𝗖𝗵𝗮𝗶𝗻 𝗚𝗼𝘃𝗲𝗿𝗻𝗮𝗻𝗰𝗲 The most sophisticated breaches now target upstream suppliers rather than direct infrastructure. The future security model extends behavioral monitoring, automated response, and continuous validation across digital supply chains. One manufacturer discovered their most significant security vulnerability in a third-party code library used by their IoT sensors—invisible to traditional Zero Trust models. The organizations achieving truly resilient security postures are those building adaptive architectures that don't just verify access but continuously validate behavior, autonomously respond to threats, and extend security governance across their digital ecosystem. The question is how quickly you can implement a truly adaptive security architecture before the threat landscape outpaces traditional approaches. 𝐷𝑖𝑠𝑐𝑙𝑎𝑖𝑚𝑒𝑟: 𝑉𝑖𝑒𝑤𝑠 𝑒𝑥𝑝𝑟𝑒𝑠𝑠𝑒𝑑 𝑎𝑟𝑒 𝑝𝑒𝑟𝑠𝑜𝑛𝑎𝑙 𝑎𝑛𝑑 𝑑𝑜𝑛'𝑡 𝑟𝑒𝑝𝑟𝑒𝑠𝑒𝑛𝑡 𝑚𝑦 𝑒𝑚𝑝𝑙𝑜𝑦𝑒𝑟𝑠. 𝑇ℎ𝑒 𝑚𝑒𝑛𝑡𝑖𝑜𝑛𝑒𝑑 𝑏𝑟𝑎𝑛𝑑𝑠 𝑏𝑒𝑙𝑜𝑛𝑔 𝑡𝑜 𝑡ℎ𝑒𝑖𝑟 𝑟𝑒𝑠𝑝𝑒𝑐𝑡𝑖𝑣𝑒 𝑜𝑤𝑛𝑒𝑟𝑠.

There's a temptation in IoT to push out more data just because you can - the assumption being more updates equal better insights. But the real win isn’t in collecting data; it’s knowing when to send it. This challenge isn’t just a software problem or a hardware problem - it’s both. You might ship a device with excellent low-power hardware, yet the software doesn’t fully leverage its capabilities. Or the hardware might be built assuming constant connectivity because the team hasn't set clear thresholds for when data actually matters. The result? Unnecessary data transfers, wasted battery, and system underperformance.  The best-performing IoT products get it right from the start. Hardware and software teams align early on: ↳ What data truly matters? ↳ What can be processed at the edge? ↳ And when should the data be transmitted? By shifting from real-time updates to time-based or event-driven updates, devices can power down connectivity during idle periods - we’ve seen power savings of 50% in some cases.  Looking ahead, AI-driven scheduling will be a major focus in 2025. We’re going to use software to smartly predict the best moments to transmit - balancing power constraints with real-world   conditions - while not overcomplicating algorithms that operate at the edge.  Ultimately, it’s not about constant connection - it’s about constant awareness. Deliver the right data at the right time, and your devices will last longer, perform better, and yield smarter insights. Like, Comment or Follow for more IoT insights.

Deep Lateral Movement in OT Networks - Vedere Labs This research report is the first systematic study into how #attackers can move laterally between different network segments and types of #networks at the #controller level – #Purdue level 1 (L1) – of #OT networks. We show how attackers can cross security perimeters in interfaced #Basic #Process #Control #Systems (#BPCS) / #Safety #Instrumented #Systems (#SIS) architectures or perform detailed manipulation of equipment in fieldbus networks nested behind #PLCs to bypass functional and safety constraints that would otherwise prohibit cyber-physical attacks with the most serious consequences. In this report, we present: • Two new vulnerabilities affecting Schneider Electric Modicon #PLCs and allowing for #remote #code #execution and #authentication #bypass (Section). • An overview of lateral movement on level 1, including different real-world #BPCS / #SIS architectures and #third- #party #package unit setups, relevant #lateral #movement options and related #attacker use-cases (Sections 3 and 4). • A realistic #attack #scenario on #critical #infrastructure where lateral movement on level 1 allows an attacker to cause #physical #damage to a movable bridge (Section 5). • An in-depth discussion and demonstration of an L1 #RCE and lateral movement #proof-of-#concept using previously undisclosed authentication bypass and RCE #vulnerabilities against fully patched #Schneider #Electric M340 & M580 PLCs (Section 6). • Our conclusions and thoughts on hardening L1 #devices and #networks against the discussed #threats (Section 7). Centro de Investigación de Ciberseguridad IoT - IIoT IoT Security Institute Chapter Chile IoT Security Institute Chapter Guatemala IoT Security Institute Chapter Colombia