Disgusted with new trends forcing equipment to internet cloud connected

[soby]

Your Results May Vary. But my experience with warrantees and guarantees is
so poor, esp in recent times, that the warrantee is NOT even a consideration in
a purchase. Mostly likely I can always return something that is faulty when
delivered, the chances diminish rapidly with time, no matter what is written on
the paper. I have many stories... Bruce Roe

I can agree with you on that since most companies will look to find any reason to deny a claim. A common excuse to deny a claim is not doing the preventative maintenance.

This may be an exception to that trend since sompanies like SMA, SolarEdge and Enphase can't really use these excuses. Their products don't require preventive maintenance and all of the relevant use data is accessible to them.

[solardreamer]

I also use Home Assistant and can access SMA's data through their local API.

People using home automation tools have been hit the hardest by the Enphase firmware change. Others are finding out they have no visibility on their PV system even with a home battery during extended power/Internet outages.

[oregon_phil]

That is beyond unreasonable. For my SMA inverter, to resolve my initial firmware update issues, SMA technical support had me manually reload the firmware, confirm proper operation, then shutoff automatic firmware updates to ensure inverter functional stability. This is a totally different methodology than what enphase is doing.

[cgetut]

I can agree with you on that since most companies will look to find any reason to deny a claim.

Luckily in the United States we have the magnuson moss warranty act. It is perfectly ok for you to do your own maintenance. It is also illegal for them to deny a hardware warranty for anything that you do that did not cause the problem yourself. i.e. They can't say that simply because you did not allow them access to your equipment that they are going to deny your warranty when your security settings did not cause the failure.

I'll explain it like this. When vendors force you to use cloud services for command and control of your equipment... you are not controlling your equipment. You are asking permission from someone else's servers to access and control something that is behind your firewall. It is the digital equivalent of buying a house and the real estate agent keeping the keys and telling you you must call them for entry and exit or to make any changes to your house.

It is also a security joke. Secure commercial and industrial systems typically go by a "zero trust" model. That means that no one, including the vendor, gets access to the system unless there is a documented need and documented changes that take place. Home owners that have a clue should also not be penalized for running their equipment in a zero trust model. Zero trust does NOT mean disconnected, but it does mean isolated in a way that guarantees that only the owner of the device has access to it either directly within the isolated network or remotely via VPN or other technology. It also does not mean that firmware cannot be updated or that remote support cannot be provided, but it does mean that you do not trust the vendor to do it unless you are explicitly opening the network up for short durations for the the work to be done, but then immediately closed back down again.

People should be INSISTING that this model be available to them for any equipment that they purchase from $20 IoT devices up to tens or hundreds of thousands of dollars worth of solar equipment. Cloud control for things behind your firewall is a security joke and should never be a requirement.

Enphase, among others, is trying to spin this as... well you can't get support if it is offline, or it won't get updates if it is offline. Which is utter BS. It should NOT get updates or support as long as the owner of the system has not allowed it. But if so, it is a quick couple of settings to get a system online in a way that support CAN be provided and firmware can be downloaded and applied.

They are doing everything in their power to spin it in a way that makes this look good, but there simply is none when the owner cannot isolate the network.

[nomadh]

I was 75% done with negotiations and planning with an installer to Enphase micro-inverters and their battery system installed along with a 18KW solar grid and luckily I did my homework and found that Enphase was just on the cusp of releasing new firmware for most of their devices that requires cloud based control systems. Meaning I would have to ask permission from servers that I don't control to be able to control equipment at my home behind my firewall. They are also implementing this and have started threatening void of warranties if you block this firmware from loading despite protections from the Magnuson Moss warranty act that prevents them from doing so.

There is a huge reason why industrial control systems in use are considered a joke security wise if they require an internet connected cloud system to be able to control those systems. I work in the IT security field and cannot in good conscience install any system that requires the usage of off site servers to be able to control and get reporting for my system. It truly is a security joke, but a very bad one. Before I started with Enphase I had a quote for a Generac system that also required the same thing.

People with a security clue have to start standing and pushing back against this crap. Yes, it should be something available to users who don't to control this themselves, but in any other case it should not be forced on users. It really is the equivalent of buying a home and your real estate agent insisting that you not get a key to your own home and that you must ask them for permission to come and go. Also the security of the system is much greater when there is a zero trust model in place. This is the same model that any good industry or commercial site uses for control systems. A home owner should not be forced to trust the maker of any system they choose. There should be no connection to the system possible unless the owner of the system is aware of it and there is a documented need for even the manufacturer to connect to the equipment. Then the homeowner would allow them access for support or a firmware upgrade.

The cloud security model is a joke and people need to wake up.

So everyone bought a system with local control and now enphase is not only selling new systems without it but stealing it from past customers? New people have the option to not buy. Current customers need a class action lawsuit. Personally I'd sue for the entire replacement cost as I didn't buy that theiving cloud control model.

[nomadh]

Let me be the devil's advocate here:

These companies are warranting their equipment for 10-25 years. Let's think of some scenarios:

1) You call them up in 2042 and say, "Hey, SolarEdge, three of my panels stopped producing yesterday and it's probably your microinverters that died. Send me replacements since I'm in year 22 of the 25 year warranty period!"
This is a tricky support situation except for the fact that they already have access to the microinverter data and can determine what's going on remotely. One (out of 31) of my microinverters died due to infant mortality within a month and my installer, SolarEdge and I could all see the data showing the slow demise of that microinverter. They sent a new one and we sent back the dead one.

2) You call them up in 2029 and say, "Hey, LG Chem, my battery has completely died since all the lights are off and it's reporting an error through the SolarEdge inverter."
So they have a qualified tech come and determine that the voltage on the battery dropped irreparably low for some reason and the whole things needs to be replaced... except that SolarEdge already has all of the battery usage history and determines that someone created a battery charging profile that prevents the battery from ever charging. Whoever did that is at fault and not LG Chem or SolarEdge.

It all comes down to warranty support and remote troubleshooting. These companies want the data to understand the failure modes and don't want to have to count on you to take good notes or pull logs when needed.

I'm fine with the vendor ALSO having the information but they don't get to make me dependant on THEM for my reading of the info.