The Raritan Blog

IoT is Taking Over, Secure and Prepare Yourself

Posted on February 23, 2018 by Rick Gonedes  |  Comment (0)

According to the Gartner research company, the number of devices with wireless internet connectivity is expected to approach 21 billion by the year 2020. That places the average person, globally, in possession of roughly 1.6 wireless devices. In the west, the estimate per person is four to five such devices. This is the Internet of Things (IoT), and the one thing that’s certain is you will have a potentially unlimited number of tech vendors vying for your attention, information, and money.

The first thing we should understand in this coming sea of connectivity is the rights of customers. As a customer in the IoT world you will have the right to;

  • Uninterrupted coverage
  • Open industry standards
  • Protection from unauthorized access and detection
  • Access to a wide range of vendors
  • Consistent performance across devices and locations
  • Power efficient devices that communicate as needed
  • Access to proven platforms
  • Guaranteed levels of service
  • Wide scalability
  • Long lasting, persistent network connectivity

As competition within IoT grows, these ten expectations will increasingly represent vectors by which users can assess the quality of the service they receive. Any infringement of these rights can also serve as a warning sign that users may have a security problem.

The scale of the problem may be hard to imagine now, to understand the security risks that are approaching all you have to realize is how connected you are to an internet-connected device. Most households have at least one connected device that they use for a large chunk of things. As the IoT grows- people will have to adopt the technology in order to remain competitive in the workforce. That means your IoT service will be with you all of the time. Your mobile devices will interact with machines in your environment and be deeply interconnected with your daily productivity.

This is why basic Internet access has transformed from a plaything to an everyday necessity. Just as you have the right to expect your Internet service to function as expected in a secure and robust way- your IoT service will be equally indispensable.

So, what happens when your IoT security is breached?

Perhaps the best example can be found in the medical industry, which is adopting IoT faster than any other sector. Consider the fact that GPS devices are being used to track Alzheimer's patients and the developmentally disabled who could wander out of safety. What happens if a device belonging to such a vulnerable person gets hit with a denial of service attack?

Other significant vulnerabilities exist within manufacturing. These days, the manufacturing sector depends on IoT for basic functionality to monitor production and reduce inefficiencies. IoT has become so pervasive in manufacturing that companies cannot remain competitive on a day to day basis without constant service.

Other examples of IoT dependent industries include retail, transport, and even law enforcement.

Fortunately, IoT capability is not being implemented without concern for security. Manufacturers and security firms are working together to close backdoors and provide security on the level of the individual device. This means creating things like smartwatches, web-capable automobiles, and haptic toothbrushes that have the ability to safeguard the data they generate- doling it out only to authorized devices and recipients. It also means preventing bad-faith vendors from attacking the ability of a service provider to render connectivity and then offering their own service as a replacement.

As IoT continues to pervade our daily lives, we will endeavor to secure the gateways between devices and ensure the wealth of IoT data generated flows legitimate sources to legitimate repositories. Without a doubt, a noticeable level of uncertainty will present itself. But in time, those who are vigilant will successfully harness this technological wave and reap the benefits. To learn more about IoT and how Legrand is using this platform for new product development visit our Eliot Program page, here

All Recent Comments

William Nelson wrote on 07/16/09:

Hi James

john wrote on 08/13/09:

Has anyone heard of Green Collar Operations? http://www.greencollaroperations.com

I received a notice from them. I guess they work with Austin Energy and help process the rebates for energy efficiency measures like radiant barrier, insulation, weatherization etc. Looking for some feedback

lee wrote on 10/10/09:

I wonder if voltage optimisation across the power supply would also cut energy costs.

raritan wrote on 06/25/10:

case studies sounds good

please email me some ppt.

.(JavaScript must be enabled to view this email address)

thank you

Dorothy Ochs wrote on 07/10/10:

Hello. Raritan’s client case studies are posted online at http://www.raritan.com/resources/case-studies/. The client case studies that Raritan is speaking about at the DCD San Francisco show include JR Simplot, eBay and Microsoft to name a few. The only one of those clients that formally has a case study written already is JR Simplot. That case study can be found at http://www.raritan.com/resources/case-studies/JR-Simplot.pdf

I’d be happy to share a copy of the presentation with you after the show.

Steve Chambers wrote on 08/26/10:

Hi Allen, would love to see your numbers some day.  What Cisco’s competitors always fail to measure is the impact of their/our technology across the data center: ie. especially the impact on network gear.

If you scale UCS out to 112 blades then you will only need the two fabric interconnects verses ten times as many switches that competitors need.  All those ports and switches suck up power, as we know, but nobody (apart from Cisco) seems to do that math.

 

Looking forward to seeing more,

Steve

Nicole Espasa wrote on 09/15/10:

The link should work now, please let me know if you’re still having probelems accessing the firmware.

September 16 Thermal Management Industry Summary & wrote on 09/16/10:

[...] Raritan has published a new blog post titled, “It’s NOT about the Aisles, it’s about the I…      Tags electronics cooling, thermal management Categories News [...]

Allen Yang wrote on 10/22/10:

I wrote on this blog last time that Raritan IT will monitor the incremental power consumption of the Cisco UCS we deployed, while we gradually migrate some rack-mount physical servers as VMs onto the UCS blades.  The following results reflect our migration activities between 2010-08-05 and 2010-10-20.  We have 2 UCS chassis that we call UCS1 and UCS2, and both of them are installed on our Cisco Rack 4.  During the time period from 08/05 to 10/20, we had the following physical activities:

08/11: Turn on two blades on UCS for engineering testing

08/15: Turn on 2nd 10Gib port on Fabric Interconnect

08/30: Remove 2 VMware ESX Servers (2 Dell PowerEdge 1950)

09/01: Turn 1 additional blade on UCS2 to measure its effect on power consumption

09/03: Remove SharePoint Test Server (a Dell PowerEdge 2850) and DNS2 (a 1U PC-server)

09/14: Migrate BES as a VM onto UCS blade (an HP Proliant DL140)

09/20: Migrate Exchange Server (a Dell PE1950) as a VM onto UCS blade; turn testing blade off

10/11: Turn one UCS blade on for Oracle JDE remote DR site

 

From Power IQ data reading we have the following observations:

 

1. Each UCS blade we have consumes roughly 4.3 KWh per day.  This is somewhat consistently demonstrated from measuring the total power consumption of the observed systems including the 2 UCS chassis and the non-UCS physical servers.  On 08/11, the measurement was 334.6 KWh.  On 08/12, 24-hours later after turning on 2 UCS blades, the measurement was 339.7KWh.  Since then the UCS power consumption stayed at that level until the next even on 08/15.  This 4.3KWh incremental power consumption per UCS blade per day was also consistently measured between 09/01 and 09/02 when IT turned on the 3rd blade on UCS2 to measure incremental power consumption.

 

2. Migrating mildly loaded physical rack-mount servers as VMs onto the UCS blades typically doesn’t increase much power consumption.  We Installed VMware ESX host on UCS and migrated two physical application servers onto UCS blade, and we couldn’t even find material difference before and after adding these 2 VMs onto UCS.  But the power savings from decommissioning physical servers can be clearly seen.  On 08/30, we removed 2 ESX host physical servers (Dell PowerEdge 1950), the total power consumption dropped by 6.55KWh a day.  Then on 09/03, we removed another PowerEdge 2850 (a Sharepoint test Server) and a 1-U PC server (DNS); and we saw a drop of power consumption by 7.2KWh a day.  Therefore, we see a clear power saving advantage from migrating physical servers into VMs.

 

3. The new version of Power IQ is very helpful in data exporting and giving power consumption insights at various levels of details.  We captured several diagrams from Power IQ to see the trend over time, then right from there we export the data into Excel spreadsheet, and we can examine the day by day details in there.

Charlette Reaux wrote on 10/23/10:

Long time reader / first time poster. Really enjoy reading the blog, keep up the good work. Will most definitely start posting more in the future.

Rick wrote on 11/05/10:

Will there be a demo VM of dcTrack?

Henry Hsu wrote on 03/14/11:

Yes!

Raritan now has multiple instances of dcTrack available in a hosted / cloud environment (as virtual machines) for customer demos. Please contact your Raritan sales representative (or email .(JavaScript must be enabled to view this email address)) to arrange for access to one.

Dave Clark wrote on 03/21/11:

Henry,

  This is very useful.  Any possibility you can do same thing for 415/240v 3-phase strips?

paula wrote on 03/21/11:

Thank you!!  This clear language explanation was just what I needed & had been unable to find anywhere.  Expecting the 3-phase calculator to be equally helpful.  And the non-pushy plug for Raritan is well-written & effective grin

Henry Hsu wrote on 04/07/11:

Hi Dave,

The reason I didn’t create a 415V version—even though we have an extensive line of 415V power strips both in the U.S. and internationally—is because unlike the 208V 3-phase strips, 415V 3-phase arithmetic is straightforward. This is because 415V power strips are wired “line-to-neutral”, otherwise known as “3-phase WYE”.

What that means in English is that any given outlet only affects a single line. Each circuit will be one of the following:

L1 to Neutral: Servers on these outlets place their load directly on L1
L2 to Neutral: Servers on these outlets place their load directly on L2
L3 to Neutral: Servers on these outlets place their load directly on L3


So to find out how much current is on L1, you just add up the current from all the servers on the one circuit. Unlike a 208V 3-phase power strip, the rest of the servers on the power strip do not affect L1 at all. This is a remarkably convenient truth about 415V power distribution, and one of the reasons some of my biggest clients are using 400V 3-phase distribution to the cabinet.

Let me know if that is unclear in any way.

3-Phase Balancing Act « Virtually From Scrat wrote on 06/07/11:

[...] happen to like the Raritan 3Ø Rack PDU Calculator and Henry Hsu does a great job of explaining the understanding problem on their blog. The Excel spreadsheet they provide is straightforward to use and does all the pertinent math for [...]

Wish to remain anonymous wrote on 07/11/11:

This spreadsheet incorrectly utilizes what seems to becoming known as the Oregon Fudge Factor. This factor is in reality the power that could become available to us in a reactive load is as a result of the phase angle difference between the phases in a 3 phase system. In a 3 phase system, the additional power that becomes available to us is 1.732, the square root of 3. In a 208v single phase (polyphase) circuit, the additional power that could become available to us in a reactive load (not resistive load) is 2/square root of 3 or 1.15470054. So you are incorrectly subtracting it from the sum of single phase load and not adding it to the 208v polyphase circuit.

Walt Stevens wrote on 09/01/11:

Hello, wonderful calculator.  It is helping with my project with a 60 amp(48 amp) 17.3 KVA PDU.  I have one twist in that this PDU also has and additional 120v NEMA 5-15 receptacle which uses Phase X to Neutral. 

Any suggestions on how to get a better estimate of Phase X amperage with this additional outlet on the PDU. ?

How would this 115V output on Phase X upset the phase balance. 

Thanks

Bob wrote on 09/26/11:

The calculation for the L1 “Capacity Remaining” for the two 60A sheets are using the incorrect breaker values. They are using 40, but should be 45 and 48. Is it possible to add a sheet for a 100A feed?

chris wrote on 09/27/11:

Hi

I wonder if you can help ?

 

We are doing some rough non invasive monititoring in factory.

 

We can calibrate the monitor units for UK single phase power, but will only be putting a clamp on one of the phases on the 3 phase - I know there are inaccuracies but what would be an appropriate multiplier factor for the power in a 415V 3 phase system top give teh power in this?

 

Thanks

 

Chris

Other Blog Posts

View all Blog Posts

Subscribe


Upcoming Events

Data Center World Global 2018
March 12 - 15  •  San Antonio, TX‎
NAB Show 2018
April 7 -12  •  Las Vegas, NV
Interop ITX 2018
April 30 - May 4  •  Las Vegas, NV

View all Events

Latest Raritan News

Ashley Fox of Raritan Inc. Recognized as 2018 CRN Channel Chief
Posted on February 12, 2018
Packet, Myriad Supply, Raritan, and Data Center Knowledge to Participate in ‘Managing the Edge’ Webinar
Posted on November 12, 2017
Raritan Employees Support Green Community Projects
Posted on November 8, 2017
Data Center of 2025 — What to Expect
Posted on October 26, 2017
Congratulations to LinkedIn’s Hillsboro, Oregon, Data Center
Posted on July 5, 2017

View all news