The 2025 CES: Safety, Longevity and Interoperability Remain a Mess

Once again this year, I’m thankfully reporting on CES (formerly also known by its de-acronym’d “Consumer Electronics Show” moniker, although the longer-winded version is apparently no more) from the remote comfort of my home office. There are admittedly worse places to visit than Las Vegas, especially given its newfound coolness courtesy of the Sphere (which I sadly have yet to experience personally):

That said, given the option to remain here, I’ll take it any day, realizing as I say this that it precludes on-camera cameos…which, come to think of it, is a plus for both viewers and myself!

(great job, Aalyia!)

Anyhoo, I could spend the next few thousand words (I’m currently guesstimating, based on repeated past experience, which in some years even necessitated a multi-part writeup series), telling you about all the new and not-new-but-maturing products and technologies showcased at the show. I’ll still do some of that, in part as case study examples of bigger-picture concepts. But, to the title of this writeup, this year I wanted to start by stepping back and discussing three overriding themes that tainted (at least in my mind) all the announcements.

Safety

(Who among you is, like me, old enough to recognize this image’s source without cheating by clicking through first?)

A decade-plus ago, I told you the tale of my remote residence-located Linksys router that had become malware-infected:

Ever since then, I’ve made it a point to collect news tidbits on vulnerabilities and the attack vectors that subsequently exploit them, along with manufacturers’ subpar compromise responses. It likely won’t surprise you to learn that the rate of stories I’ve accumulated has only accelerated over time, as well as broadened beyond routers to encompass other LAN and WAN-connected products. I showcased some of them in two-part coverage published five years ago, for example, and disassembled another (a “cloud”-connected NAS) just a few months back.

The insecure-software situation has become so rampant, in fact, that the U.S. Federal Communications Committee (FCC) just unveiled a new program and associated label, the U.S. Cyber Trust Mark, intended to (as TechCrunch describes it) “help consumers make more informed decisions about the cybersecurity of the internet-connected products they bring into their homes.” Here’s more, from Slashdot’s pickup of the news, specifically referencing BleepingComputer’s analysis:

It’s designed for consumer smart devices, such as home security cameras, TVs, internet-connected appliances, fitness trackers, climate control systems, and baby monitors, and it signals that the internet-connected device comes with a set of security features approved by the National Institute of Standards and Technology (NIST). Vendors will label their products with the Cyber Trust Mark logo if they meet NIST cybersecurity criteria. These criteria include using unique and strong default passwords, software updates, data protection, and incident detection capabilities. Consumers can scan the QR code included next to the Cyber Trust Mark labels for additional security information, such as instructions on changing the default password, steps for securely configuring the device, details on automatic updates (including how to access them if they are not automatic), the product’s minimum support period, and a notification if the manufacturer does not offer updates for the device.

Candidly, I’m skeptical that this program will be successful, even if it survives the upcoming Presidential administration transition (speaking of which: looming trade war fears weighed heavily on folks’ minds at the show) and in spite of my admiration for its honorable intention. As reader “Thinking_J” pointed out in response to my recent teardown of a Bluetooth receiver that has undergone at least one mid-life internal-circuits switcheroo, the FCC essentially operates on the “honor system” in this and similar regards after manufacturers gain initial certification.

One of the root causes of such vulnerabilities, IMHO, is any reliance on open-source code, no matter that doing so may ironically also improve initial software quality. Requoting a two-decades-plus younger version of myself, in reference to an even earlier exploit I experienced:

Open-source software has some compelling selling points. For one thing, it’s free, and the many thousands of developer eyeballs peering over it generally result in robust code. When a vulnerability is discovered, those same developers quickly fix it. But among those thousands of eyeballs are sets with more nefarious objectives in mind, and access to source code enables them to develop exploits for unpatched, easily identified software builds.

I also suspect that at least some amount of laissez-faire tends to creep into the software-development process when you adopt someone else’s code versus developing your own, especially if you subsequently “forget” to make proper attribution and take other appropriate action regarding that adoption. The result is a tendency to overlook the need to maintain that portion of the codebase as exploits and broader bugs in it are discovered and dealt with by the developer community or, more often than note, the one-and-only developer.

Sometimes, though, code-update neglect is intentional:

Consumer electronics manufacturers as a rule make scant (if any) profit on each unit sold, especially after subtracting the “percentage” taken by retailer intermediaries. Revenue tangibly accrues only as a function of unit volume, not from per-unit profit margin. Initial-sale revenue is sometimes supplemented by after-sale firmware-unlocked feature set updates, services, and other add-ons. But more often than not, a manufacturer’s path to ongoing fiscal stability involves straightforwardly selling you a brand-new replacement/upgrade unit down the road; cue obsolescence by design for the unit currently in your possession.

Which leads to my next topic…

Longevity

One of the products “showcased” in my August 2020 writeup didn’t meet its premature demise due to intentionally unfixed software bugs (as was the case for a conceptually similar product in Belkin’s Wemo line, several examples of which I owned when the exploit was announced). Instead, its early expiration was the result of an intentional termination of the associated “cloud” service done by its retail supplier, Best Buy (Connect WiFi Smart Plug shown above).

More recently, I told you about a similar situation (subsequently resolved positively via corporate buyout and resurrection, I’m happy to note) involving SmartLabs’ various Insteon-branded powerline networking products. Then there was the Spotify Car Thing, which I tore down in early 2023. And right before this year’s CES opened its doors to the masses, ironically, came yet another case study example of the ongoing disappointing trend: the $800 (nope, no refunds) Moxie “emotional support” robot, although open source (which, yes, I know I just critiqued earlier here) may yet come to the rescue for the target 5-10 year old demographic:

Government oversight to the rescue, again (?). Here’s a summary, from Slashdot’s highlight:

Nearly 89% of smart device manufacturers fail to disclose how long they will provide software updates for their products, a Federal Trade Commission staff study found this week. The review of 184 connected devices, including hearing aids, security cameras and door locks, revealed that 161 products lacked clear information about software support duration on their websites.

Basic internet searches failed to uncover this information for two-thirds of the devices. “Consumers stand to lose a lot of money if their smart products stop delivering the features they want,” said Samuel Levine, Director of the FTC’s Bureau of Consumer Protection. The agency warned that manufacturers’ failure to provide software update information for warranted products costing over $15 may violate the Magnuson Moss Warranty Act. The FTC also cautioned that companies could violate the FTC Act if they misrepresent product usability periods. The study excluded laptops, personal computers, tablets and automobiles from its review.

Repeating what I said earlier, I’m skeptical that this effort will be successful, despite my admiration for its honorable intentions. In no small part, my pessimism stems from recent US election results, given that Republicans have (historically, at least) been disproportionally pro-business to the detriment of consumer rights. That said, were the manufacturer phase-out to instead be the result of something other than the shutdown of a proprietary “cloud” service, such as (for example) a no-longer-maintained-therefore-viable (or at-all available, for that matter) proprietary application, the hardware might still be usable if it could alternatively be configured and controlled using industry-standard command and communications protocols.

Which leads to my next topic…

Interoperability

Those of you who read to the bitter end of my recently published “2024 look-back” tome might have noticed a bullet list of topics there that I’d originally also hoped to cover but eventually decided to save for later. The first topic on the list, “Matter and Thread’s misfires and lingering aspirations,” I held back not just because I was approaching truly ridiculous wordcount territory but also because I suspected I’d have another crack at it a short time later, at CES to be precise.

I was right; that time is now. Matter, for those of you not already aware, is:

…a freely available connectivity standard for smart home and IoT (Internet of Things) devices. It aims to improve interoperability and compatibility between different manufacturers and security, always allowing local control as an option.

And Thread? I thought you’d never ask. It’s:

…an IPv6-based, low-power mesh networking technology for Internet of things (IoT) products…

Often used as a transport for Matter (the combination being known as Matter over Thread), the protocol has seen increased use for connecting low-power and battery-operated smart-home devices.

Here’s what I wrote about Matter and Thread a year ago, in my 2024 CES discourse:

The Matter smart home communication standard, built on the foundation of the Thread (based on Zigbee) wireless protocol, had no shortage of associated press releases and product demos in Las Vegas this week. But to date, its implementation has been underwhelming (leading to a scathing but spot-on recent diatribe from The Verge, among other pieces), both in comparison to its backers’ rosy projections and its true potential.

Not that any of this was a surprise to me, alas. Consider that the fundamental premise of Matter and Thread was to unite the now-fragmented smart home device ecosystem exemplified by, for example, the various Belkin Wemo devices currently residing in my abode. If you’re an up-and-coming startup in the space, you love industry standards, because they lower your market-entry barriers versus larger, more established competitors. Conversely, if you’re one of those larger, more established suppliers, you love barriers to entry for your competitors.

Therefore the lukewarm-at-best (and more frequently, nonexistent or flat-out broken) embrace of Matter and Thread by legacy smart home technology and product suppliers (for which, to be precise, and as my earlier Blink example exemplifies, conventional web browser access, vs a proprietary app, is even a bridge too far)…Suffice it to say that I’m skeptical about Matter and Thread’s long-term prospects, albeit only cautiously so. I just don’t know what it might take to break the logjam that understandably prevents competitors from working together, in spite of the reality that a rising tide often does end up lifting all boats…or if you prefer, it’s often better to get a slice of a large pie versus the entirety of a much smaller pie.

A year later, is the situation better? Not really, candidly. For a more in-depth supplier-sourced perspective, I encourage you to read Aalyia’s coverage of her time spent last week in Silicon Labs’ product suite, including an interview with Daniel Cooley, CTO of the company. Cooley is spot-on when he notes that “it is not unusual for standards adoption to progress slower than desired.” I’ve seen this same scenario play out plenty of times in the past, and Matter and Thread (assuming they eventually achieve widespread success) won’t be the last. I’m reminded, for example, of a quote attributed to Bill Gates, that “We always overestimate the change that will occur in the next two years and underestimate the change that will occur in the next 10.”

Cooley is also spot-on when he notes that Matter and Thread don’t necessarily need to go together; the Matter connectivity standard can alternatively use Ethernet (either wireless, aka Wi-Fi, or wired) for transport, along with Bluetooth Low Energy for initial device setup purposes (and speaking of wireless smart home network protocols, by the way, a quick aside: check out Z-Wave’s just-announced long range enhancements). And granted, there has been at least some progress with both Matter (in particular) and Thread over the past year.

Version 1.4 of the Matter specification, announced last November, promises (quoting from Ars Technica’s coverage) “more device types, improvements for working across ecosystems [editor note: a concept called “Enhanced Multi-Admin”], and tools for managing battery backups, solar panels, and heat pumps”, for example. And at CES, the Connectivity Standards Alliance (CSA), which runs Matter, announced that Apple, Google, and Samsung will accept its certification results for their various “Works With” programs, too. That said, Amazon is notably absent from the CSA’s fast-track certification list. And more generally, Ars Technica was spot-on with the title of its writeup, “Matter 1.4 has some solid ideas for the future home—now let’s see the support.” See you back here this same time next year?

The Rest of the Story

(no, I don’t know what ballet has to do with smart rings, either)

Speaking of “approaching truly ridiculous wordcount territory”, I passed through 2,000 words a couple of paragraphs back, so I’m going to strive to make the rest of this piece more concise. Looking again at the list of potential coverage technology and product topics I scribbled down a few days ago, partway through CES, and after subtracting out the “Matter and Thread” entry I just discussed, I find…16 candidates left. Let’s divide that in two, shall we? Without further ado, and in no particular order save for how they initially streamed out of my noggin:

• Smart glasses: Ray-Ban and Meta’s jointly developed second-generation smart glasses were one of the breakout consumer electronics hits of 2024, with good (initial experience, at least) reason. Their constantly evolving AI-driven capabilities are truly remarkable, on top of the first-generation’s foundational still and video image capture and audio playback support. Unsurprisingly, therefore, a diversity of smart glasses implementations in various function and price-point options, from numerous suppliers and in both nonfunctional mockup, prototype and already-in-production forms, populated 2025 CES public booths and private meeting rooms alike in abundance. I actually almost bought a pair of Ray-Ban Meta glasses during Amazon’s Black Friday…err…week-plus promotion to play around with for myself (and subsequently cover here at EDN, of course). But I decided to hold off for the inevitable barely-used (if at all) eBay-posting markdowns to come. Why? Well, the recent “publicity” stemming from the New Orleans tragedy didn’t help (and here I thought “glassholes” were bad). Even though Meta Ray-Ban offers product options with clear lenses, not just sunglasses, most folks don’t (and won’t) wear glasses all the time, not to mention that battery life limitations currently preclude doing so anyway (and don’t get me started on the embedded batteries’ inherent obsolescence by design). And when folks do wear them, they’re fashion statements. Multiple pairs for various outfits, moods, styles (invariably going in and out of fashion quickly) and the like are preferable, something that’s not fiscally feasible for the masses when the glasses cost several hundred dollars apiece.
• Smart rings: This wearable health product category is admittedly more intriguing to me because unlike glasses (or watches, for that matter), rings are less obvious to others, therefore it’s less critical (IMHO, at least) for the wearer to perfectly match them with the rest of the ensemble…plus you have 10 options of where to wear one (that said, does anyone put a ring on their thumb?). There were quite a few smart rings at CES this year, and next year there’ll probably be more. Do me a favor; before you go further, please go read (but come back afterwards!) The Verge’s coverage of Ultrahuman’s Rare ring family (promo videos at the beginning of this section). The snark is priceless; it was the funniest piece of 2025 CES coverage I saw!
• HDMI: Version 2.2 is enroute, with higher bandwidth (96 Gbps) now supportive of 16K resolution displays (along with 4K displays at head-splitting 480 fps), among other enhancements. And there’s a new associated “Ultra96” cable, too. At first, I was a bit bummed when I heard this, due to the additional infrastructure investment that consumers will need to shoulder. But then I thought back to all the times I’d grabbed a random legacy cable out of my box o’HDMI goodies only to discover that, for example, it only supported 1080p resolution, not 4K…even though the next one I pulled out of the box, which looked just like its predecessor down to the exact same length, did 4K without breaking a sweat. And I decided that maybe making a break from HDMI’s imperfect-implementation past history wasn’t such a bad idea, after all…
• 3D spatial audio: Up to this point, Dolby’s pretty much had the 3D spatial audio (which expands—bad pun intended—beyond conventional surround sound to also encompass height) stage all to itself with Atmos, but on the eve of CES, Samsung unveiled the latest fruits of its partnership with Google to promulgate an open source alternative called IAMF, for Immersive Audio Model and Formats, now also known by its marketing moniker, “Eclipsa Audio”. In retrospect, this isn’t a terrible surprise; for high-end video, Samsung has similarly settled on HDR10+ versus Dolby Vision. But I have questions, specifically as to whether Google and Samsung are really going to be able to deliver something credible that doesn’t also collide with Dolby’s formidable patent portfolio. And I also gotta say that the fact that nobody at Samsung’s booth was able to answer one reporter’s questions doesn’t leave me with a great deal of early-days confidence.
• TVs: Speaking of video, I mentioned more than a decade ago that Chinese display manufacturers were beginning to “make serious hay” at South Korea competitors’ expense, much as those same South Korea-based companies had previously done to their Japanese competitors (that said, it sure was nice to see Panasonic’s displays back at CES!). To wit, TCS has become a particularly formidable presence in the TV market. While it and its competitors are increasingly using viewer-customized ads (logging and uniquely responding to the specific content you’re streaming at the time) and other smart TV “platform” revenue enhancements to counterbalance oft-unprofitable initial hardware prices, TCS takes it to the next level with remarkably bad AI-generated drivel shown on its own “free” (translation: advertising-rife) channel. No thanks, I’ll stick with reruns of The Office. That said, the on-the-fly auto-translation capabilities built into Samsung’s newest displays (along with several manufacturers’ earbuds and glasses) were way cool.
• Qi: Good news/bad news on the wireless charging front. Bad news first: the Qi Consortium recently added the “Qi Ready” category to its Qi2 specification suite. What this means, simply stated, is that device manufacturers (notably, at least at the moment, of Android smartphones) no longer need to embed orientation-optimization magnets in the devices themselves. Instead, as I’m already doing with my Pixel phones, they can alternatively rely on magnets embedded in accompanying cases. On the one hand, as Apple’s MagSafe ecosystem already shows, if you put a case on a phone it needs to have magnets anyway, because the ones in the phone aren’t strong enough to work through the added intermediary case material. And—I dunno—maybe the magnets add notable bill-of-materials cost? Thickness? Weight? Or they interfere with the phone’s speakers, microphones and the like? Or…more likely (cynically, at least), the phone manufacturers see branded cases-with-magnets as a lucrative upside revenue streams? Thoughts, readers? Now for the good news: auto-moving coils to optimize device orientation! How cool is that?
• Lithium battery-based storage systems: Leading suppliers are aggressively expanding beyond portable devices into full-blown home backup systems. EcoFlow’s monitoring and management software looks quite compelling, for example, although I think I’ll skip the solar cell-inclusive hat. And Jackery’s now also selling solar cell-augmented roof tiles.
• Last but not least: (the) RadioShack (licensed brand name, to be precise) is back, baby!

And, now well past 3,000 words, I’m putting this one to bed, saving discussions on robots, Wi-Fi standards evolutions, full-body scanning mirrors with cameras (!!), the latest chips, inevitable “AI” crap and the like for another day. I’ll close with iFixit’s annual “worst of show” coverage:

And with that, I look forward to your thoughts on the things I discussed, saved for later and skipped (intentionally or not) alike in the comments!

—Brian Dipert is the Editor-in-Chief of the Edge AI and Vision Alliance, and a Senior Analyst at BDTI and Editor-in-Chief of InsideDSP, the company’s online newsletter.

Related Content

• CES 2025 coverage
• IoT device vulnerabilities are on the rise
• Routers infected with malware: Owners (and manufacturers) beware
• Disassembling a Cloud-compromised NAS
• 2025: A technology forecast for the year ahead
• A Bluetooth receiver, an identity deceiver
• Open Source: Keep It Current Or Suffer The Consequences
• Heartbleed: the wakeup call the open-source community needed?
• Obsolescence by design, defect, or corporate decree

The post The 2025 CES: Safety, Longevity and Interoperability Remain a Mess appeared first on EDN.