> "HomeKit doesn't require a proprietary Apple chip, I have no idea where you got that idea."

A few sources disagree:

http://www.ibtimes.com/apple-homekit-devices-wont-include-go...

> "Apple’s MFi guidelines require manufacturers to use only Wi-Fi or Bluetooth, and also include a specialized chip for authentication"

http://www.digitaltrends.com/home/everything-that-works-with...

> "The certification ensures that these smart home devices have an authentication chip and have undergone rigorous testing to get Apple’s official seal of approval"

http://www.eetimes.com/document.asp?doc_id=1327267

> "Apple Inc. requires anyone making a device compatible with its HomeKit environment to buy and use a special identity chip."

Now, I don't have access to the official docs for MFi - so maybe these sources are all wrong. But I'm pretty confident a special chip is required.

Huh, you might be right. I've never run across any references to this before, all I've seen in the past is about how HomeKit has very high security standards and that's why a lot of devices don't work. Still, without access to the MFi documentation, it's not clear if this chip is actually required or if it's just the easiest way to meet the security requirements that HomeKit imposes.

The Homebridge project provides HomeKit compatibility without Apple authorization. I don't know if Apple controls this using patents or trademarks but you don't technically need Apples authorization.

I'm pretty sure that when you register a Homebridge instance to your Apple device though you get a message about the accessory being in test mode.

Homebridge is presumably making use of some debug mode that you wouldn't use in a shipping product - and if you did, Apple wouldn't let you advertise it as officially compatible with HomeKit.

From what I can tell from Homebridge they provide HomeKit emulation - not compatibility. You're running a local Node server to emulate the Homekit API.

Still neat - but hardly the sort of thing that implies you can ship a product utilizing Homekit without following the MFi spec.

To emulate the iOS HomeKit API, meaning you can write plugins for it to provide support for non-HomeKit-enabled devices. But presumably Homebridge itself must still vend itself as a HomeKit-enabled device on the network or else you wouldn't be able to control it.

All I know is that I have Philips Hue lights, Belkin Wemo switches, and a Nest thermostat and none of them connect to HomeKit. For the Hue I have to buy a new bridge, Belkin says that they can't support it without completely new hardware[1], and Nest is completely mum on the issue but presumably there's no hope of support in the near future.

These devices all have active developer communities and good API/interaction. I plugged my Amazon Echo in and it immediately detected all three and allowed me to control them seamlessly. I don't know what the specific issue is but it sure seems like Apple is the problem.

[1]: http://www.belkin.com/us/support-article?articleNum=187953

The issue is Apple's security standards.

Yes, it is a security standard issue, but it's enforced with hardware. So, while this is there for a reason (possibly even setting a standard for these IoT devices), it's not simply a lack of developers building secure software. It's with the hardware not being spec'd to meet these "arbitrary" security standards. I say arbitrary because clearly no one else in the game is using it. So, I think the OP is correct here, Apple has made a product that simply doesn't work with other products due to their own decisions.

Edit: Typos

As a disclaimer I'm not really an apple fan and have found all of their products to be blah to me.

Considering the rise in IoT based DDoS attacks and the ftc going after companies like D-Link for poor security practices, aren't security standards like Apple is requiring something we want to commend?

Insteon is still an insecure and unencrypted protocol, just the new homekit hub is 'more secure' now, controlling insecure items.

You can also install a general homekit proxy with a general nodejs server called homebridge. That homekit proxy can control anything with any kind of security.

So at this point it's just another proprietary standard unfortunately :( Might as well call it another MFi program.

It is part of the MFi program.

What would you like Apple to do?

The same standards that let a stranger stand in front of your door and say "hey Siri, open the front door" and walk right in?

Out of curiosity, how does the required chip/hardware help defend against this?

I was going to reply to the person that replied to you (I had agreed with you and thought it was just beefier hardware they'd need to handle the encryption demands) but it turns out they specifically require a certain type of coprocessor:

> Where many companies fail to secure their products at all or use simple 128-bit encryption, all HomeKit certified hardware includes a dedicated security co-processor paired with 3072-bit keys and the very secure Curve25519 key exchange system

http://www.howtogeek.com/232235/htg-explains-why-does-apples...