An Embedded Perspective - dataio.com Perspective - From Design to Life...interference can affect the...

www.abiresearch.com

IoT SECURITYFROM DESIGN TO LIFE CYCLE MANAGEMENTAn Embedded Perspective

Sponsored by

A Changing Threat LandscapeThe expansion of the Internet of Things (IoT) is ushering in a new era of ubiquitous connectivity that

reaches far beyond the current digital setting. PCs and smartphones are the core endpoints underpinning

information and communication technologies (ICT), but the landscape is rapidly changing. Today, they

represent only half of the 32 billion connected devices globally.

By 2022, an estimated 70% of the 57 billion connected devices will be of the IoT variety. Their applications

are as broad as they are varied, and already permeate all aspects of modern societies, from personal to

corporate, and healthcare to industrial, among many others.

The success of the IoT will largely depend on the ability to trust the applications delivered, both in hardware

and in software. The growing popularity of any platform will attract the interest of threat actors keen to

exploit vulnerabilities for profit and gain. Weaknesses can and will be leveraged to disrupt IoT systems and

coopt devices as malicious attack tools, predictably mirroring commonplace events plaguing ICTs. Stuxnet,

Mirai, and WannaCry are all disconcerting examples of successful cyberattacks that have impacted the IoT.

Security sits at the core of enabling trust, but it is regrettably not an integral part of the IoT growth discussion.

Often times, security is rendered later, and not always successfully. Yet, trust must start with the device,

https://www.abiresearch.com/

2IOT SECURITY: FROM DESIGN TO LIFE CYCLE MANAGEMENTwww.abiresearch.com

in the hardware itself, if it is to be effective. Inherently, this starting point is with a Root of Trust (RoT), a

security primitive capable of performing services such as authentication and attestation, by providing a

trusted computing base that holds private keys, product certificates, and secure boot functionality.

Chart 1: IoT: Hardware Security vs Devices, World Markets, Forecast: 2017 to 2022 Source: ABI Research

Currently, few IoT original equipment manufacturers

(OEMs) make use of RoT-based hardware when

developing their products, with embedded security

shipments representing less than 4% of new IoT devices

available on the market today. However, such attitudes

are set to change going forward as the ecosystem

increasingly understands the need for trusted

hardware. By 2022, secure IoT embedded security

shipments will represent almost 20% of new IoT devices

(see Chart 1).

Significantly, a vulnerable IoT landscape has implications beyond digital degradation. As the IoT connects

operational technologies, cyber-physical systems, and other control processes to the digital realm, the

impact of a cyberattack can adversely affect the physical world.

In the last few years, numerous proofs-of-concept by security researchers have shown that digital

interference can affect the proper functioning of IoT devices: remotely disabling brakes in a connected

car or hacking drug infusion pumps to release fatal doses. Unsurprisingly, the U.S. government has

included cyberthreats targeting critical infrastructure in black sky scenarios. And beyond such

critical safety events, a vulnerable IoT ecosystem has massive data protection, privacy, and confidentiality

implications for all users.

More commonplace, however, and perhaps more dangerous, is the issue of intellectual property (IP)

theft and pirate manufacture. The cloning of electronic devices is widespread and especially problematic

in supply chain manufacturing. Reverse engineering off-the-shelf devices can allow cloning of printed

circuit boards and microchips, but the more recent problem stems from the growth of contract

manufacturing performing device provisioning services on behalf of OEMs.

The increased numbers of external parties in the manufacturing process has been an unfortunate

enabler for IP theft and cloning, as designs are more easily leaked or stolen. As the OEM must hand

over public and private information related to hardware to the contractor, it opens up threat vectors for

unauthorized interception.

The danger lies in these designs then being used to create ersatz devices that serve critical and

functional safety applications, such as engine management or voltage sensing. Often, they do not go

through proper Q&A testing or auditing processes, and are inherently more prone to faults and failures.

The obvious consequences are life-threatening at worst, but at the least, could land an OEM with liability

and warranty issues.

-

1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

2017 2018 2019 2020 2021 2022

Billio

ns

IoT Embedded Security Shipments

New IoT Connected Devices

This product was downloaded by [email protected] on Feb. 23, 2018



Why the Lack of Comprehensive Security?Despite the obvious critical nature of these threats, there is a comprehensive lack of security in

many IoT product developments and subsequent deployments. IoT players are simply not prioritizing

cybersecurity in either manufacturing or implementation. Initially, this was due to low awareness and

limited understanding of the risks involved, particularly in operational technologies, little, if any, in-house

security expertise, and the lack of reference architectures and standards for IoT security technologies.

Nonetheless, this is changing with the growing media visibility of IoT cyberattacks, and the increasing

costs related to both IP theft and device failures.

Despite better knowledge of risks, cost and time-to-market considerations often supersede security

concerns, especially when such risks are difficult to quantify accurately. Belief that air-gapped systems

or proprietary platforms are secure also leads to a distorted understanding of risks. And even

where there is awareness, the problem shifts to the lack of ease of use and simplicity in deploying

available cybersecurity solutions. This is where a growing body of standards and specifications or even

reference architectures and guidelines is helping to address the issue, although many of these efforts

are still fairly nascent.

Further, the broad diversity of the IoT ecosystem and a host of interoperability and integration

issues means security is particularly difficult to implement. Existing cybersecurity solutions are not so

easily ported to the IoT; they need to be adapted to the many new form factors and use cases that are

emerging in the space. This is in stark contrast to traditional ICTs, where devices narrowly diverge in

terms of form factor, architecture, radio technology, and operating system.

A new approach is needed where the IoT products’ chain of trust (CoT) is understood and reviewed,

with corrective measures put in place in order to help prevent and mitigate breaches. This starts with

the design of the IoT product and the integrated circuits (ICs) that devices use, continues with the

secure programming of a RoT into the system, extends to how the device is manufactured, and persists

throughout the life of the product with secure software updates and active patch management.

IoT Products’ Chain of Trust (CoT) Source: ABI Research

Secure Designof IoT Product

Inclusion ofa Secure IC

Secure Programming& Provisioning of RoT

Secure DeviceManufacture

IoT Product LifeSecure Software Updates

Active Patch Management




The current preference is to tackle IoT security from a software and network management perspective,

simply because these can be more easily adapted after product development. Adding security last, and

often post-market, is fairly consistent with the general, albeit eroded view that security is a stopgap.

While software and network security are essential elements, alone they do not confer comprehensive or

effective security.

The absentee in the ecosystem is hardware-based security. Often unfavorably considered in IoT

implementations, its value should not be underestimated. Secure hardware can enable better device

life cycle management, not only by addressing existing gaps in IoT security, especially regarding identity,

authentication, and access control, but also by opening up new added value opportunities for IoT

players, such as over-the-air (OTA) servicing and updating.

Most importantly though, securing the manufacturing and development process is paramount to

ensuring the integrity of the CoT. Anchoring trust in the hardware, and protecting the supply chain

does not need to be cost, time, or resource prohibitive. It is becoming increasingly affordable, even for

semiconductor distributors and smaller IoT OEMs in the space.

Secure Provisioning and ManufacturingIntroducing hardware security into an IoT device starts at the design phase. The architects should

be leveraging secure system designs, such as secure elements or secure MCUs, from silicon IP and

semiconductor manufacturers to develop secure devices.

These designs should include immutable secret data that can be embedded onto the device,

such as unique cryptographic keys and certificates, secure loaders (i.e., secure boot managers and

authenticators), and other secure identifiers. This secret data forms the RoT of a device and can then

be used for crypto-processors and accelerators, security engines, and controllers, among other security

logic that may be loaded later. In turn, this logic can serve any number of purposes, e.g., provision identity

or ownership, create digital signatures, encrypt/decrypt, authenticate, authorize, etc.

The secret data form the root authority of the device, which is the first element in the CoT. Each subse-

quent function and application created for the device is derived from that root.

Architects must also plan for the secure programming and provisioning of that secret data during the

manufacturing process. This involves the set-up and management of a key injection process, which is

executed in a secure environment and certified to comply with strict security requirements.

Secret DataForms the Root

authority of the device Subsequent function &application created for the device

1 2+

ApplicationFunction




The issue with threat vectors in contract manufacturing can be solved by wrapping the secret data

together with other public information (e.g., production counts and how software updates can be

enabled later) at the OEM site, before it is sent to the contractor’s programming center. The wrapped

data are tied to a specific provisioning system (such as a secure, tamper-resistant hardware security

module) at the programming center where the data can be securely unwrapped and injected into the

secure element or secure MCU.

Mutual authentication mechanisms (e.g., a PKI) are used at both the OEM and the contractor sites,

first to create the secret data, then to wrap them, and finally to securely transmit the information to the

contractor. The contract manufacturer can then securely provision devices, uniquely binding the secret

and public data to each device based on the information determined by the OEM.

For resource-intensive hardware (e.g., secure MCUs), this can include a secure mastering process for

loading software application images (e.g., the OS and other applications) into a secure boot manager, for

example, and other product information for the system. A secure manufacturing appliance integrated in

the programmer itself can provide this loading function.

Once the memory is programmed securely (either in one-time-programmable, embedded flash, or

other) with all the secret data, and securely provisioned within the device, it is then logically and physically

locked to ensure tamper resistance.

Properly provisioned devices provide IoT OEMs tighter control over downstream manufacturing

and can serve to prevent overbuilding, limiting piracy and cloning of unauthorized ICs and

devices further down the supply chain. For a hardware base to be truly secure, it must go through

this “zero trust” development process. From design and provisioning to manufacturing and

production, all of these steps need to take place in a secure, controlled environment.

While this process has traditionally been performed by semiconductor suppliers for large customers,

semiconductor distributors are also investing in secure programming and provisioning services that pro-

vide the same level of security and support for the broader market.

Development tools, especially for secure MCUs, are an important aspect of secure development

and deployment, and need to continue to evolve to support better security. Moving away from just

supporting advanced cryptographic libraries, the development tools must now focus on leveraging the

security world inside devices, ensuring that certificates and keys are developed and operated on, and

providing secure patches that can target specified devices.




Secure Elements Evolution: Smart Cards and Mobile Pave the WayThe widespread adoption of tamper-resistant hardware, such as secure elements and secure

MCUs, has been a critical driver for the advancement of secure, low-cost, and power-constrained

technology in smart card markets. In particular, secure IC usage has driven global standards for smart

card applications in numerous sectors, from payment and banking (ticketing, credit cards) and telephony

(SIM cards), to various types of identity services (healthcare, government).

Advances in the smart card technology facilitated the development of authentication ICs, which

emerged as a promising hardware-based security technology for the IoT to ensure secure authentication

of devices to networks, identity, and access control applications. While both are considered secure

elements, the difference in a smart card is that the secure IC can be soldered onto a printed circuit

board and embedded within other components, devices, or equipment. This portability, added to

connectivity capability and the small form factor, make it a valuable technology for securing low-cost

connected things.

Chart 2: Shipments of Authentication IC, World Markets, Forecast: 2018 to 2022 Source: ABI Research

The use of authentication ICs has proven to

be well-adapted for IP and brand protection over

the last decade. In 2017, more than 1 billion

authentication ICs shipped globally, with a 50%

growth rate expected by 2022, and almost 400

million of those will be leveraged in IoT applications

(see Chart 2). The most popular use cases for

the technology include enterprise printer

cartridges, smart card readers, mobile TV, USB

secure tokens, and standalone secure one-time-

programmable generators.

The mobile platform naturally developed its own set of new technologies, including trusted execution

environments (TEE) and NFC embedded secure elements. These form factors are adapted to take

advantage of the greater computing and power resources available through smartphones.

As the smart mobile platform evolved to include tablets and wearables, it increasingly converged

with computing platforms and M2M/IoT applications, adapting and leveraging technologies such as the

trusted platform module (TPM 2.0) and embedded SIM (eSIM) where appropriate.

0

50

100

150

200

250

300

350

400

450

2018 2019 2020 2021 2022

Milli

ons

Other

Utilities and Industrial

Smart Cities and Buildings

Wearables

Smart Homes




This industry convergence has been a hotbed of innovation for the secure hardware market,

with continuously improved feature-sets particularly well-suited for embedded and resource-

constrained IoT devices. Secure elements are currently the foundation for the successful

realization of any markets revolving around authentication, access control, and identity, which are

the precursors to deploying other security technologies, from software to network. While they are

the mainstay of this domain today, the continued expansion of IoT platforms will also drive the

evolution of secure elements to include more complex and feature-rich functionalities.

Embedding security into an increasingly greater variety of IoT hardware is already well underway.

The next step is expanding the functionality of secure elements to address new and growing demands

in the broader embedded IoT landscape, including industrial, automotive, and smart spaces. The goal

is to enable new applications beyond those maturing in the smart card space, such as enabling secure

industrial communications, motor control, wireless connectivity (e.g., BLE, LP/LR-WANs), precision

measurement applications, and power conversion applications, among many others.

Most of the hardware platforms for embedded systems are currently based on low-cost MCUs, with

processors typically ranging from 8-bit to 64-bit. However, price points for 32-bit MCUs have dropped

drastically over the past few years, driving greater adoption in newer devices. In addition, advances in

microelectronics have created sophisticated system-on-chip solutions, resulting in MCUs with diverse

functionalities in a single package.

Increasingly, security is becoming a part of that feature set, and an emerging market for secure MCUs for

the IoT is gaining ground rapidly. Defined as a type of authentication IC, a secure MCU has fuller process-

ing capabilities and the possibility of programming the software to perform a variety of tasks, such as

provisioning for a hardware-based RoT. This is comparatively different from a simpler IC, which reads

data from input and performs actions based on instructions written in the memory, generally performing

that one task.

At its core, a secure MCU is essentially a microcontroller with

tamper-resistant aspects using either a dedicated security

hardened central processing unit (CPU), or a hardened

embedded security domain and normal CPU. These then

leverage various encryption engines, accelerators, and

libraries, Random Number Generators, and secure

non-volatile (NV) storage. Critically, a secure MCU

must include the ability to securely host an immutable

key pair embedded in the non-volatile storage

and authenticate it.

MCU with embedded security domain

or security hardened CPU

Tamper-proof non-volatile memory for secure key storage

SECURE MCU

Systems, memories, clocks, timers

Encryption engines

& libraries

RNGs, CRCs, crypto

accelerators

Connectivity & communication




Functionalities of a secure MCU should allow for secure boot, secure communication and data

protection. Broadly speaking, this class of MCUs is a less resource-intensive, or discrete version of a

TEE, designed specifically for IoT devices (and often for those using the Arm Cortex-M family of

processor cores).

Secure MCUs are most efficient in implementations requiring a strong security infrastructure.

Often, the secure MCU is tied to a device life cycle management platform and supported by the

manufacturer with associated software tools (including drivers, application programming interfaces, and

middleware) that enable remote management, updates, and patching (notably via OTA).

New Market Dynamics Driving Secure DemandThe broadening market offering secure elements provides greater choice for implementers, and their

decision to go with an authentication IC or a secure MCU, or other technology, will be entirely dependent

on the use cases planned for the IoT product. Considerations such as risk appetite, cost, time-to-market,

and post-market service provisioning will weigh in as well.

Currently, authentication ICs are well entrenched in the digital home and PC-connected devices market,

dominated by the enterprise printer cartridge market and consumer accessories for anti-counterfeiting

and brand protection purposes. More than 99% of authentication ICs shipped are targeted at those mar-

kets. More recently, however, there has been interest in leveraging authentication ICs in smart spaces

(homes, cities, buildings, etc.), most notably around smart home appliances, smart home gateways, and

other industrial use cases, such as programmable logic controllers.

Chart 3: Shipments of Secure MCUs, World Markets, Forecast: 2018 to 2022 Source: ABI Research

While the secure MCU market is still fairly nascent,

traction is initially emerging in the industrial and

utilities sector. Global shipments of secure MCUs

are projected to hit almost 20 million this year,

but their growth rate over the next 5 years is

expected to be highly dynamic, with more

than 367 million shipments forecast for 2022.

Demand is highest in the utilities and industrial

sectors, but uptake in wearable, smart home,

building, and city applications is anticipated to

follow closely behind.

The driver behind secure MCU growth revolves around the increased interest to bundle multiple

applications and services in IoT devices. Sectors that are being digitally transformed and increasingly

connected are having to face significant structural changes, impacting functions that have traditionally

been performed in a closed and siloed manner.

0

50

100

150

200

250

300

350

400

2018 2019 2020 2021 2022

Milli

ons

Utilities and Industrial

Smart Cities and Buildings

Wearables

Smart Homes




For example, the two-way communication infrastructure being implemented in energy grids is

enabling smart power management, from generation to distribution. Operators are looking at how they

can leverage not only commercial off-the-shelf ICTs, but also new sensing technologies, automation,

machine learning, and analytics to render the grid more efficient. Opening previously closed systems to

connected networks and the Internet increases vulnerabilities.

Security requirements need to go beyond simply incorporating authentication, access control, and

identification mechanisms. From substations to smart meters, additional security capabilities will

have to include real-time endpoint protection, intrusion detection, incident response, and other threat

management features, applied to both information and operational technologies. This transformation

will require the new generation of industrial appliances to include some form of security at the hardware

level in order to enable expanded security functions.

In a similar manner, manufacturers of consumer IoT devices, such as connected white goods

(refrigerators, washing machines) and home security (cameras and smart door locks), are already

envisioning how to link their connectivity to new and existing applications, such as social, payment,

retail, fitness, servicing, etc. Consumer appliances provide an opportunity to tie in numerous third-party

applications and connect to other devices owned by the user, harvesting and exchanging data, and

creating additional value from that information. A secure hardware base in all of these devices minimizes

potential threat vectors that could usurp the intended functionalities, siphon personal data, or degrade

the various appliances.

IoT implementations, whether in a business or in a consumer space, involve numerous third parties.

Gone are the days when appliances are simply sold and operate in a silo. Connectivity, the ability to

serve multiple applications, and broad and varying use cases are all factors that are expanding the

opportunities for post-market servicing and third-party integration.

Life cycle device management offers manufacturers the ability to continue providing value, long after

a device has been sold and even re-sold. Critically though, that management service only has value

if it can be tied securely back to the device, and the onboarding of a device into an IoT application is

securely controlled. Secure hardware (such as secure elements and secure MCUs) are at the forefront of

providing this trust.

Life Cycle Device Management

Secure design & development

Secure programming& manufacture

Secure deployment& monitoring

Secure servicing& updating




Without this process, any future service provisioning for the device post-market is vulnerable. The

increased recognition that the IoT opportunity cannot be realized without trust is a significant driver

for market adoption. This realization is also being pushed by standards development, and policy and

regulatory efforts to address these emerging security gaps.

Standards, Policy, and RegulationStandards and frameworks play a significant role in enabling trust. Security standards, specifically, can

provide a foundation for building robust and trusted IoT devices, both from a digital and a physical

security perspective. Secure design and later integration can be more robustly delivered through the

consistent application of standards, specifications, and reference architectures.

The development of IoT security standards is not a clear-cut effort. Mature international standards

already exist around ICTs and mobile devices, as well as for securing critical-safety systems (with

many derived from IEC 61508, the functional safety of electrical/electronic/programmable electronic

safety-related systems). Most of the working groups behind those standards are actively discussing how

to incorporate digital security for the IoT into some of those standards, and debate is equally active

around applying them for various sectors, including automotive, avionics, healthcare, transportation,

and industrial.

In the interim, a few standardization bodies have put out best practices and guidelines, notably the

U.S. National Institute of Standards and Technology (NIST), ISA ETSI, IETF, IEC, ISO, GSMA, IEEE,

GlobalPlatform, and TCG, among many others. Of notable interest are the efforts of the NIST, which has

put in place a Cybersecurity for IoT Program and makes available a number of publications to the general

public, including a few focusing on hardware security.

Similarly, the European Union Agency for Network and Information Security (ENISA) IoT SECurity

(IoTSEC) Experts Group has published quite a few best practice cybersecurity documents for smart

homes, airports, hospitals, transportation systems, and cities, and all stress the importance of hardware

security, alongside other technologies.

Newer IoT-focused organizations are also actively developing reference architectures, best practices,

and guidelines for developers. The Alliance for Internet of Things Innovation, the Industrial Internet

Consortium, Industrie 4.0, and Internet of Things Security Foundation are among the most prominent.

Still other groups are focusing on implementing projects based on open-source technology, such as the

Linux, Eclipse, and prpl foundations.

At the legislative level, the United States is still building on the 2013 Executive Order “Improving Critical

Infrastructure Cybersecurity” and the NIST’s subsequent Cybersecurity Framework, and is now working

toward an “Internet of Things Cybersecurity Improvement” bill. Various sectoral agencies (the FDA, HHS,

NERC, EPA, DOT, FEMA, TSA, etc.) are each focused on setting up security working groups, developing

policy and regulation that focus on implementing cybersecurity within their remits. Importantly, the NIST

is planning a specific Cybersecurity Framework Application to IoT in the coming year, which the agencies

will be able to adapt more specifically to their sectors.




The EU is not far behind in trying to address cybersecurity for operational technologies, leveraging

the ENISA, EU sectoral agencies, and national authorities to tackle the issue as harmoniously as possible

between its member states. The EU updated its cybersecurity strategy in November 2017, reinforcing

the need to protect critical infrastructures, as well as future technology developments, and clearly stipu-

lating the need to secure the IoT and movements such as Industrie 4.0.

In November 2017, the EU recently proposed a “Cybersecurity Act” that will include common policy

or certification requirements for IoT devices. Secure hardware inclusion will likely be a significant

contributing factor to successful certification. The EU also aims to refresh existing directives as well.

Two legal instruments are set to come into force in the spring of 2018 that will tighten cybersecurity

regulation and catch IoT devices in their scope.

The first is the EU’s General Data Protection Regulation (GDPR), which replaces an earlier 1995 direc-

tive that has become outdated and suffers from a lack of harmonized implementation across member

states. The second is a directive on security of network and information systems (the NIS Directive)

targeting critical infrastructure operators primarily, with the goal of making them accountable for cyber-

security. Both will bring IoT security within their scope.

Clearly, IoT technology developments are going to be buffeted by increasing security imperatives,

whether from implementers, standardization bodies, or public sector agencies. The resulting demands

will be for comprehensive implementation, from secure hardware to secure service provisioning.

Adapting to Future DemandThere is little doubt that secure hardware will form the supporting foundation for

greater trust in the IoT. The varying and diverse use cases will require the

availability of different form factors, with secure elements that can offer

lightweight, single-task functions, as well as more resource-intensive,

multi-function secure MCUs capable of serving numerous different

applications. From the secure manufacture of device hardware,

to the authentication of a legitimate product, and to enabling

the secure OTA delivery of critical updates, there is a host of

choice in secure elements.

For silicon and semiconductor companies, the focus is

two-fold going forward. The first is to ensure that the design

of IoT hardware includes security, if only as options to be

activated later, even for the simplest application. Critically, this

includes secure manufacturing and secure programming of that

hardware to establish a CoT. If there is no security hardware for a

manufacturer to choose from, the inclusion of security in the finished

product will be limited and lacking. For low-cost and simple devices, such as sen-

sors and controllers, no secure hardware will mean no security at all.

Varying & Diverse Use CasesSecure Hardware

Lightweight | Single-task Functions

Resource Intensive | Multi-function




The second is an effort to educate themselves and the rest of the supply chain. Hardware developers

have a pivotal role to play in instigating trust, but also in raising awareness. Security should

always be part of a discussion with customers and, at a minimum, it enables information sharing

and knowledge transfer to other vendors in the supply chain. Offering a choice of secure technologies,

with different solutions tailored to specific use cases, not only showcases awareness of risks, but also an

understanding of and adaptation to different risk appetites.

All along the supply chain, each player in line should be asking their predecessors what type of security

technologies are available to build upon and enabling subsequent parties to anchor future security

features (whether software or services) on their platform. Regardless of whether the final commer-

cialized product does not utilize all the security features available, the possibility remains to activate

and leverage them at a later date, simply because the design allows it. This is critical, especially if IoT

deployments are to operate efficiently for more than a few months or years in the field.

A securely programmed hardware-based trust is the starting point from which a comprehensively

secure IoT ecosystem can be built. It is not a barrier to efficient IoT implementation. On the contrary,

it is an enabler of productive IoT devices, flexible platforms and secure services, efficient post-market

management, and longer device life spans.



Published February 22, 2018©2018 ABI Research

249 South StreetOyster Bay, New York 11771 USA

Tel: +1 516-624-2500www.abiresearch.com

About ABI Research

ABI Research provides strategic guidance for visionaries needing market foresight on the most compelling transformative technologies, which reshape workforces,

identify holes in a market, create new business models and drive new revenue streams. ABI’s own research visionaries take stances early on those technologies,

publishing groundbreaking studies often years ahead of other technology advisory firms. ABI analysts deliver their conclusions and recommendations in easily and

quickly absorbed formats to ensure proper context. Our analysts strategically guide visionaries to take action now and inspire their business to realize a bigger picture.

For more information about ABI Research’s forecasting, consulting and teardown services, visionaries can contact us at +1.516.624.2500 in the Americas, +44.203.326.0140

in Europe, +65.6592.0290 in Asia-Pacific or visit www.abiresearch.com.

© 2018 ABI Research. Used by permission. ABI Research is an independent producer of market analysis and insight and this ABI Research product is the result of

objective research by ABI Research staff at the time of data collection. The opinions of ABI Research or its analysts on any subject are continually revised based on the most

current data available. The information contained herein has been obtained from sources believed to be reliable. ABI Research disclaims all warranties, express or implied,

with respect to this research, including any warranties of merchantability or fitness for a particular purpose.

www.abiresearch.comThis product was downloaded by [email protected] on Feb. 23, 2018


An Embedded Perspective - dataio.com Perspective - From Design to Life...interference can affect the...

Documents

Transcript of An Embedded Perspective - dataio.com Perspective - From Design to Life...interference can affect the...