I initially bought the bridge because I thought a wireless relay spliced into the hardwired door switch would be too much trouble, so I'll spend a little and save some time. Boy, was I wrong.
Then a few months later I decided to try again and be very careful and deliberate, and ... it worked. Just like it was supposed to. Sigh. No idea what incantation I did right, but now it has been working for several years without a hitch.
I did recently buy a ratgdo (well, ordered it at least, it hasn't arrived). That's my backup plan if the Home Bridge decides to go tits up.
It'd be possible for a knows-enough-to-be-dangerous customer to modify their system in such a way that they unwittingly allow unauthenticated local access. From my point of view, Chamberlain/MyQ should be totally indemnified in such scenarios but I'm not sure how murky the legalities would be in terms of getting judges/juries to accept "caveat emptor".
EDIT: Maybe there's a way to ensure customers have signed an indemnification agreement before unlocking local API access? I guess there'd also need to be a way to ensure/promote a factory reset if/when ownership/rentalship changes.
I agree it's wiser to avoid such situations but a lot of people end up delegating this kind of responsibility. If enough of them end up burning their own fingers, that could go badly for a provider. Even if frivolous lawsuits weren't a thing, a spate of ignorant but angry social media posts could be very damaging.
Again, I'm not saying I necessarily have a solution or that hardware owners should have hurdles placed in their way. I'm just pointing out that in some ways the provider may be damned in one way if they do and damned in another way if they don't.
I suppose the IoT sub-sector will end up in similar proportions to other, older tech: Some vendors, analogous to e.g., Red Hat or Linode, will specialize in catering to enthusiasts / power-users and have fairly noncommittal / at-your-own-risk / no-warranty license agreements. However, if the past is any indication, most people will end up doing a lot of business in walled-garden analogs of Apple or Facebook.
I'm sure this is a solvable and solved problem, but I do believe it is non-trivial, and potentially a major headache for a company to implement just to support a tiny niche of users. I'd be delighted to find out I'm wrong though!
And, unfortunately, the business case isn't there, since this weakens lock-in effects. I don't endorse this reason—that's why I run my own HA instance and don't buy or use any products that require the cloud or otherwise can't be operated entirely locally (including flashing Valetudo to my robot vacuum!).
It’s not a perfect solution since it costs money but it’s a nice alternative to exposing your HA instance or some other front end proxy to the internet.
It is also much easier for those without easy access to extra static IP addresses. Given the target audience I think it's probably the right approach.
If you served the entire US (130 million households) and had a 1 hour keepalive, that's only 36k packets per second, which is nothing.
You could also auto-train the idle timeout by using a pair of TCP connections. One uses a known good value while the other probes upwards until it finds its connections start getting closed (with some optional binary search fanciness), feeding new known good values back to the first.
(Obviously the no-cloud solution is better still)
https://support.nuki.io/hc/en-us/articles/12947926779409-MQT...
Either way, they'll almost certainly pull the plug on this service sometime before the end of the decade.