You can access the device when you're away from home if it's internet connected. Of course, the server doesn't need to be doing much besides proxying connections.
You don’t need a cloud server to remotely access a device.
Having options like this is great for powerusers, but the vast majority of people are not that. They need something that just works. Of course that still doesn't mean they need their garage door collecting telemetry data, but they need something more than a LAN-connected smart device.
This is where ideas like non-shit IoT, Right to Repair, Free (Libre) Software, and even "how to not fuck up foreign aid 101", all converge. The point isn't to make everyone their tech support. The point is to allow local communities to be more self-sufficient, able to manage technology on their own - as opposed to outsourcing everything to some faceless companies that have no attachment to any given community.
Note that this doesn't preclude business - on the contrary, local businesses are the fundamental part of any community larger than couple dozen people; the ideas converge not on everyone doing stuff pro bono, but on small, local businesses* doing things for their communities, accumulating and retaining know-how.
I wish more people from aforementioned movements realized their ultimate goal (at least in form that's possible in the real world) is the same, and joined forces.
They're really two different markets, the bulk of the home automation market doesn't want to spend $10K+ for a contractor to check the same feature boxes that something on the shelf at Home Depot can do for a 3-digit price tag. Labor is really expensive, so home automation contractors operate almost exclusively on the high-end of the market.
2) Even if the above were not true, at that point you're back to an internet enabled smart home device system, and now we're simply picking which vendor to trust over the other. But in both cases, the option for the vendor to collect telemetry data about your usage of the products exists.
There is really no viable way for the typical consumer to be able to both have a good product experience for something like this, and to prevent a cloud vendor from having access to their data. Unless I'm missing something obvious.
Home Assistant Cloud is essentially a TCP-level proxy (IOW Nabu Casa sees jack squat):
> The remote UI encrypts all communication between your browser and your local instance. Encryption is provided by a Let’s Encrypt certificate. Under the hood, your local Home Assistant instance is connected to one of our custom built UI proxy servers. Our UI proxy servers operate at the TCP level and will forward all encrypted data to the local instance.
> Routing is made possible by the Server Name Indication (SNI) extension on the TLS handshake. It contains the information for which hostname an incoming request is destined, and we forward this information to the matching local instance. To be able to route multiple simultaneous requests, all data will be routed via a TCP multiplexer. The local Home Assistant instance will receive the TCP packets, demultiplex them, decrypt them with the SSL certificate and forward them to the HTTP component.
> The source code is available on GitHub:
> SniTun - End-to-End encryption with SNI proxy on top of a TCP multiplexer
> hass-nabucasa - Cloud integration in Home Assistant
Typical consumers have no way of ensuring their UI is, in fact, encrypting the data and not farming it out. They cannot verify the source code themselves, because they don't have the technical skill set they'd need to do so (nor, frankly, the time). They're reliant on the goodwill of whoever packaged and installed the offering for them not doing anything to that offering.
Technical power users can circumvent this because they can build/install from source, verify keychains, read the source, etc. Non-technical users can't do this, and need someone to help them. That someone will most likely be in the form of a third party organization that does this in exchange for money. They're placing their trust in that third party.
The point I'm getting at is that, eventually, a consumer has to trust a third party who may have incentives that don't align with their own. They're just playing a game of which vendor to place that trust in. This is why centralization is still the predominant architecture choice for the overwhelming majority of products, even in a world where myriad decentralized solutions exist for almost everything. It turns out that having bespoke third parties run decentralized solutions for customers is often not a better product experience, and still has the same root problem even if it manifests in different ways.
The problem is that approximately NONE of the commercial vendors are in any way trustworthy. They're really pushing hard the degree of abuse they inflict on the customers, and social immunity takes long time to build.
The ultimate solution IMO is to have people trust in people they can actually trust - that is, make the third parties local. A partner, a kid, a neighbor, a small company servicing the local community and physically located in it. At this scale, trust can be managed through tried-and-true social techniques humans are innately good at, and have successfully used for many thousands of years. This is how you make most of the tech industry and adjacent problems go away.
That's true for literally anything, not just IoT security and privacy. I mean, even for highly technical users, one can't do everything from scratch, nor even check and control every single aspect: you gotta trust the the computer hardware or OS you're using isn't backdoored, you gotta trust the people that built the place you live in didn't put half the rebar actually needed or wired the whole thing backwards or with thinner-than-required wires, you gotta trust that the food you eat isn't going to make you sick...
Same for HASS, one could delegate trust to a specialist that would install a HA Green or Yellow box for them, just as they do for electrical wiring. HA is only "third party" because the IoT place lacks standards but is in essence no different than wiring stuff from different vendors, where "myriads of decentralised solutions" exist only because of standards, and for which decentralisation essentially means everyone is a third party to everyone else.
So I don't think dismissing HASS as third party is fair, and wiring IoT with virtual wires is no different than wiring a breaker box. If you don't know how to do it it can be dangerous, and so you delegate and trust someone to do their job properly.
That being said, setting up the HA and Wireguard server is definitely a more demanding experience. Although once setup it's pretty much a once and done sort of thing, and they're are integrated ready to go solutions available.
It would be nice to see something like "Geek Squad" offering that sort of service instead of just running AV software while trawling for nudes on customer laptops. No guesses on what's more profitable though.
Haha, she's got you there.
I guess you started using Home Assistance recently / shortly... and/or you use only a few HA integrations.
Otherwise, you would have already run into enough troubles with updates.
Not for the average consumer.
I actually have gotten to know a lot of folks who are massive into home automation, who also know precisely fuck all about computers or whatnot.
For example, Apple Home does not work by default over WireGuard.
Allow package deliverers to put a package in your garage instead of on your step.
When I had MyQ, I used it almost exclusively when I was on my motorcycle. I had it configured so that I could tap a button on my phone that tracked my location and enabled a geofence around my house so it would ping the MyQ to open when I got about a quarter mile from home. I called this my "riding home" mode. This saved me the trouble of having to get my gloves off and open the door through the app when I got to my driveway, and I didn't have to leave a garage door opener on/with my bike.
These very practical daily occurrences can make devices incredibly annoying and frustrating for typical consumers who want it to just work.
I'd rather that it use the LAN, if I'm there at the time.
Data collection and remote access can just be their own functionality.