A Brief Exchange of Emails on 2nd August 2017

Readers shall hopefully recall the Last Note Panel page that appeared in Electronics World a few years ago? As was the custom and practice back then, Svetlana, our editor, continues to forward to me items of interest for comment. Regarding our latest exchange, she has asked me to publish something in the Blog. So be it. Always happy to oblige.

I shall begin with my reply to be followed by Svetlana's prompting Email to myself. Then lets see what readers make of it all? I wrote:

-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Hi

Many thanks for information below. I was unaware of prpl Foundation and Imagination link otherwise aware of everything else.

I agree it is a mess!

I have looked briefly at the MIPS Architecture. Another case of "Back to the Future" or as I call it the "Nothing New in.........".

The crux of the matter for IoT is Interrupts.

This goes back to the Intel 8080 v Motorola 6800 War. Intel retained Software Mask Programmable Interrupts whereas Motorola retained Hardware Driven Interrupts. Hence the 6800 Architecture became the basis for Real Time Computing, the rest is history. MIPS has 8 Hardware Driven Interrupt Lines feeding a 256 - what?

Consider if your PC or Apple Smart phone is hijacked you cannot simply switch it off and on again and end up in the same state. Military aircraft systems if they suffer an interruption of power for any reason must come back on line to the exact same state in less than a quarter of a second (say).

The Very Long Instruction Word Format and Reduced Instruction Word Format War became a separate issue to do with end applications and tasking.

With IoT we are back to the arguments with Signaling System 7 [SS7 - or the seventh time at getting it right as was the 90's in-joke] It always comes down to signaling not the encryption method applied. Nothing New!

The global security standard will be set by the NIST Cybersecurity Framework. NIST has been tasked with setting the standard for Quantum Security Algorithms for no latter than 2023. See the NTIA Fostering IoT Green Paper.

The Chinese will eventually fall in line despite recent media publications indicating to the contrary. Though it would be interesting to get a China take on the MIPS Architecture. Do you have any contacts there who could oblige?

Datod Technology, ie the algorithms published in Electronics World could easily run under the MIPS Architecture but the issue then is a migration path to Quantum Computers for both Datod Technology and MIPS technology. We are Keeping Our Powder Dry as the Americans say. There is no UK technology that could run our Sidar Algorithms in real time.

Ultimately the real Datod or Sidar Technology is the basis for Quantum Signal Processing. As I suspect you may have guessed.

The best that could happen to Imagination with Apple having lost faith in its technology is for it to be bought out by Qualcomm.

As Qualcomm was originally founded by Andrew Viterbi there is another Back to the Future lessen to be had in the divergent paths taken between Viterbi Decoding and …...?

Binary Decision making again? Or you pay your money and take your choice?

Good Input!

Many Thanks
Barry

Svetlana wrote:

Hi
Barry,

I hope you are well.
I thought you might find this of interest (see below), regarding the IoT etc.

Best regards,
Svetlana
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Security researchers have found vulnerabilities in one of Tesla’s cars and demonstrated that they can be exploited remotely to do things like open the car’s doors and force it to break while in motion. Commenting on the news is Cesare Garlati, chief security strategist at the prpl Foundation:

The danger with connected cars is the “connected” aspect. Today’s IoT devices are housing numerous vulnerabilities, waiting for hackers to exploit them and connected cars are not immune, despite the possibility for a catastrophic outcome. Just as the researcher uncovered here - and with the 2014 Jeep Hack - should a hacker gain access and find their way into more critical functions, such as steering controls or braking mechanisms, then the consequences could be life threatening. Security by separation is one of the fundamental rules of IT security, yet this type of lateral movement within the hardware is possible on most IoT systems—not just connected cars. Because of this, it opens up infinite vulnerabilities to exploit. To avoid this from happening vendors, regulators and manufacturers must carefully consider security by protecting the critical controls through hardware level security, such as virtualisation, and establishing a root of trust within the embedded system itself to prevent hackers from reflashing the software elements.

Barry McKeown

August 2017

 

BLOG COMMENTS POWERED BY DISQUS

T&M Supplement

The Annual T&M Supplement, sponsored by Teledyne LeCroy, was published in July. Click on the image above to read this exclusive report for free.

Follow us