Chronos > Software Dev

Updating the UI: Network / Remote Control Screen

<< < (2/3) > >>

NiNeff:
Looks very promising!

one more thing again:  wouldn't the "enable network interface" checkbox make sense as very first item since everything else depends on it? maybe grey out all the features not working if the net is disabled.
Also, does not enabling the network interface still leave the possibillity to connect via USB? If so that should be mentioned somewhere, preferably in the manual ;D

DDR:

--- Quote from: NiNeff on September 27, 2018, 01:51:51 PM ---wouldn't the "enable network interface" checkbox make sense as very first item since everything else depends on it? maybe grey out all the features not working if the net is disabled. Also, does not enabling the network interface still leave the possibillity to connect via USB? If so that should be mentioned somewhere, preferably in the manual ;D

--- End quote ---

Hm, this is actually a fairly deep question now that I look in to it. After talking it over with my colleagues, we've decided the problem is not as neat as I'd initially thought.

We figure that connecting via the microusb cable is a special case. Since you have to be physically present for this, you always get access to SSH and the remote control app this way. You connect your computer to the camera via USB, visit the URL it says to, and it should "just work". SSH will ask for a password, but the remote control app will not. This is non-configurable, and will always work, and will definitely be mentioned in the manual. :)

If you plug in ethernet or (hopefully!) a wifi dongle, the camera will be accessible over the local network at 192.168.*.*. If you access the app this way, it will ask for a password. SSH still asks for a password as well.

If you go into the settings and check the Enable Remote HTTPS/SSH Access boxes, you can access your camera from anywhere on the internet. (Provided you can route to it.) However, since everyone on the internet can now route to your camera, this is left off by default. HTTPS will be supplied by a self-signed certificate, which you'll have to click through a warning to accept. However, I don't think there's actually any other way for us issue a cert for a device-hosted web app, and I definitely don't want to expose the camera control through non-secure HTTP the internet at large. :-\

Since the default is now to *not* allow SSH from the internet, I'm comfortable with simply setting a password for SSH. You should still use key-based authentication for SSH if you allow access from the wider internet, but you can turn that on from the command-line.

To that end, I've mocked up two new variants of the screen.

Version 4:



Version 5:

NiNeff:

--- Quote from: DDR on September 27, 2018, 06:27:56 PM ---
We figure that connecting via the microusb cable is a special case. Since you have to be physically present for this, you always get access to SSH and the remote control app this way. You connect your computer to the camera via USB, visit the URL it says to, and it should "just work". SSH will ask for a password, but the remote control app will not. This is non-configurable, and will always work, and will definitely be mentioned in the manual. :)

--- End quote ---
Good choice! "It just works" should always be the goal :D


--- Quote from: DDR on September 27, 2018, 06:27:56 PM ---Since the default is now to *not* allow SSH from the internet, I'm comfortable with simply setting a password for SSH. You should still use key-based authentication for SSH if you allow access from the wider internet, but you can turn that on from the command-line.
--- End quote ---
How are you actually checking that the connected interface is "just" LAN? I'm not too familiar with "advanced" network setups...

Other than that I prefere version 4! It has a sowewhat clearer outline. Will there be an additional screen to manage certs or will whe have to set them up using the WebApp/ SSH?

And one very minor nit-picky detail: the port is set to 22 but the command shows 22786 :P

BiduleOhm:
I prefer the v4 because the only difference seems to be the text "Visit the [...] for remote control" which is a bit useless (we all know what to do with an URL) and use interface real estate.

DDR:

--- Quote from: NiNeff on September 28, 2018, 03:57:50 AM ---How are you actually checking that the connected interface is "just" LAN? I'm not too familiar with "advanced" network setups...

--- End quote ---
For SSH, we can restrict logons to the 192.168.x.x subnet. This subnet is not publicly routable, so it isn't accessible from the internet at large.


--- Quote from: NiNeff on September 28, 2018, 03:57:50 AM ---Will there be an additional screen to manage certs or will whe have to set them up using the WebApp/ SSH?

--- End quote ---
I think you'll have to accept a self-signed certificate. Certs are very much tied to domain names, and since the camera doesn't have a domain name it can't really be certified as being "at that domain". The whole HTTPS system falls down a bit for embedded software, unfortunately. :-\


--- Quote from: NiNeff on September 28, 2018, 03:57:50 AM ---And one very minor nit-picky detail: the port is set to 22 but the command shows 22786 :P

--- End quote ---
Oh shoot! Totally missed that one. xD


--- Quote from: BiduleOhm on September 28, 2018, 04:10:49 AM ---I prefer the v4 because the only difference seems to be the text

--- End quote ---
I moved the interface up into the header, since it selects what information is shown too. But yeah, not too much difference between the two.

Navigation

[0] Message Index

[#] Next page

[*] Previous page