I'm building an application where a mobile phone with an accelerometer is used to control an app on a computer in a similar way you would use a mouse. So I need to send the movement from the phone to the computer over some wireless protocol. I am thinking about using Bluetooth but I am not sure what transfer delay to expect. Another possibility is using 802.11g. What do you think? What delay could I expect given that I don’t hit the bandwidth limit?
I worked with a group at Motorola who linked up an external accelerometer pack to a mobile phone using Bluetooth. This work supported a mobile games development class at USC's GamePipe Laboratory, and the speed was sufficient to control the mobile games developed by the students. You'll need to make sure your handset's Bluetooth stack has the correct profile enabled to allow data communication.
Another advantage of Bluetooth over 802.11g is that the frequency hopping Bluetooth uses will make it less vulnerable to interference by all the other 802.11 devices in the vicinity, which sit on one frequency.
I wouldn't expect the amount of data sent by an accelerometer would give Bluetooth any problems.
Related
I am developing an app that controls a product's operation. The communication is via BLE. My configuration is
App - Peripheral (iOS, Android)
Product - Central (uses Laird BT900 module)
iOS as a peripheral works fine (pairing and bonding) ; Android PIN pairing works fine, but subsequent bonding (or reconnect when in range) there are a lot of issues and termination of connection. I am using the supported list of devices for Android BLE and I also understand that there are many known issues that come with different manufacturers/chipset vendors
The issue I am getting is, as seen by nrfConnect, is with descriptors. Android app doesnt show descriptors when seen in nrfConnect whereas iOS shows. I do not know what is the difference
Is it a common practice to use a phone as a peripheral ? Or is it a risk - because this is a medical device.
Are there any best practices for Android as a peripheral ?
I have following back up plans in case Android issue is not resolved. I think following would work on any BLE supported phones without having any issues with the variability.
Plan A : PIN pairing on every connection with the product. This is the most secure and most annoying
Plan B : Implement just works pairing with a app layer password before taking control of the product.
Question : Is just works safe and encrypted ? Is it snoop-safe or MITM-safe ?
Thanks in advance!
A few thoughts from your questions:
1a. (From my Android experience) I think its uncommon to have the phone be the peripheral. To my knowledge all iOS devices support peripheral mode but only a very small subset of Android devices are able to support it. I say this because I've been experimenting with BTLE beacons using the AltBeacon library. From this work I have discovered that only certain Android phones can broadcast BTLE advertise packets. Given that BTLE advertising is the first step in initiating a BTLE session I imagine that this prevents many Android phones from being compatible with peripheral mode.
If all of your users can use an iOS device, then you're set, otherwise this may be a problem.
1b) I can't speak to the specific risk of using a mobile device with your medical device, that depends on what the medical device is doing and how you're using the mobile app.
2) See 1a
3) The specific encryption scheme you used is also based on your product's risk profile. I would say that Just Works is not an ideal solution. The just works pairing process is not snoop-safe and can be re-initiated via a MITM. Other than that I can't speak to the strength of BTLE encryption.
I'm researching iBeacons. Can I connect to iBeacons while my Bluetooth is invisible (to be protected from hacks)?
I don't have beacons to test myself and can't find any clear explanation online.
iBeacons connect to mobile phones using Bluetooth, so it is essential to have that turned on. You also need to have installed an app with iBeacon support in order to receive communication from them.
If you'd wish to use a solution that does not utilize Bluetooth, you could try out IndoorAtlas. It's an indoor navigation technology based on Earth's geomagnetic fields. It's also completely hardware-free solution, just requires you to collect fingerprints in the area you are going to use for your project.
Three points:
iBeacon technology does not rely on a bluetooth connection to your phone. Beacons are one way transmitters. They do not listen to or otherwise receive any info from your device. Beacon technology following this model is inherently privacy friendly.
Mobile devices cannot detect Bluetooth beacons with the Bluetooth radio turned off. Sorry, it is just not possible.
Properly built beacon apps will not expose your mobile device's Bluetooth info because they are receive only. Of course, other apps on your phone might use bluetooth for other purposes, so your best bet is to audit apps using bluetooth and remove any that are not doing what you want.
I just bought some beacons and tested that, The answer is YES. it is possible to read beacons mac addresses while using the phone's Bluetooth connection as invisible. Using this you will get access to your beacon in any open place without getting hacked through Bluetooth.
Thanks all for your answers.
I'm not sure how to correctly phrase this question, as I'm just starting to learn Bluetooth and its ways, but... imagine holding in an iPhone or Android phone in your hand in a large building with many rooms. You pair your device with a Bluetooth master device via an antenna in that room. Then once you move from room to room, your device communicates with other antennas throughout the building, but the device treats it as one pairing.
Is this at all possible? Was Bluetooth developed with this in mind at all?
Would this still work if the antennas were wireless? My idea is for devices to communicate with nodes via Bluetooth, and nodes interact with central base via wi-fi/local router.
Also, third random question: how does using BLE affect any of this?
Please tell me if I'm crazy! Thanks!
Bluetooth 4.0 BLE allows for a slave to connect to one master. 4.1 BLE allows for more than one connection, but I don't know if anything implements that yet.
Either way, there's no sort of "roaming" method pairing devices like with wifi access points with the same SSID. BLE however doesn't require pairing like regular Bluetooth, so you could just connect to a new access point each time you lose a connection.
You can also communicate via advertising packets from the "antenna" in each room. This would facilitate information being passed from those rooms to the phone, but not the other way around. This is basically how you communicate with BLE when you don't pair/connect devices and is how iBeacons work.
If you're writing the software yourself, and installing it in the building and on the phone, then I think it should be totally possible. Bluetooth devices can detect the distance and direction of other bluetooth devices. So if both devices are running software that is designed to, and grants permission to do so, it should be no-big-deal to programmatically auto-reconnect to the new nearest antenna whenever one becomes significantly closer than the one that your phone is currently connected to. As for software that already does this that you wouldn't have to develop from scratch yourself, no idea.
i know that iBeacon use only advertising channel. which means there is no need connection.
im trying to make my own beacon module which send and receive data.
im curious about what makes the packet in iBeacon format(prefix /UUID / minor/ major/ TX) in communication ?
is it firmware?
let's assume that
when i make my iPhone act as iBeacon , it will send the advertising packet. which means it sends data in iBeacon format. but after turn off the app for iBeacon, i try to use my iphone
to send some files to laptop via Bluetooth low energy mode as usual.
then it will send data in bluetooth standard format. is this right?
given that situation, my iphone can be both iBeacon and just normal phone capable of bluetooth low energy.
i think also the beacon module can be like that. how about the product recently released? like estimote, redbearlab and so on. after connection, do they receive data?
Every iBeacon product works a little differently, but it is common for a product to be connectable for configuration purposes over Bluetooth LE.
Radius Networks' RadBeacon, for example, has firmware that sends out its advertisement as needed to be a standard iBeacon. The same firmware will allow a connection over Bluetooth LE, exchanging data with an external client (the RadBeacon app for iOS). This connectability is outside standard iBeacon functionality, using proprietary techniques that are still part of the larger Bluetooth LE standard.
Your understanding is therefore correct.
Full disclosure: I am Chief Engineer at Radius Networks.
Does anyone know how a bluetooth device could pick up the discoverable devices' device IDs in range?
I am ideally looking for the simplest solution that involves the smallest implimentation of the bluetooth protocols.
A starting point would be good, I just wish to create a device that can store all the device ids of nearby bluetooth devices with minimal power consumption, preferably just using radio frequencies and not SDP and whatever else.
If you can't help me with this, please can you help me find good reading material for low level bluetooth (step by step) communication. The reading online is so high level that I cant work out what is actually sent, when.
Laalto nailed the answer from the Bluetooth spec/stack POV, but your question implies your looking for a stand-alone Bluetooth device - not just a laptop app scanning surrounding devices.
I can only speak for the BT chips that the company I work for manufactures (Cambridge Silicon Radio - CSR) but our chips can do that pretty much out of the box. Our chips have an on-board Virtual Machine sandbox that allows access to the firmware functions and Bluetooth stack of the chip. You can easily write a C code app to run in the virtual machine sandbox, on chip, that periodically scans for discoverable devices around, grab their ids and then download them when connected via USB or Serial, or maybe over BT when a device connects to the listener directly.
www.csr.com and www.csrsupport.com for chips, dev-kits, design references, etc.. etc...
You probably want a module with the extra HW (UARTs, USB etc...) as well as just the chip but you could implement this with something the size of a BlueTooth USB or probably smaller.
It would really help to know more about what your trying to achieve, why you want something that just scans the surrounding bluetooth devices and how big the device needs to be.
Sorry if this sounds like advertising. For balance: Broadcom make BT chips too!
The Bluetooth specs from http://www.bluetooth.org are a good starting place for low-level information. You need an account to access the specs, but you can create one for free.
Basically what you need to do is to go into Inquiry mode periodically and grab the response packets as they arrive. The more time you spend in Inquiry mode, the more likely you will discover devices in range: discoverable devices enter the Inquiry Scan mode only relatively rarely; it takes some time (10.24s at least with older Bluetooth versions) to scan all the possible frequencies in the Inquiry/Inquiry Scan frequency hopping schemes. And even then you can have suboptimal radio conditions.
For implementation I suggest you at least start with existing Bluetooth libraries such as BlueZ and do not attempt to create your own from scratch.