Jump to content
Security Installer Community

Cubit

Trade ONLY
  • Posts

    6,970
  • Joined

  • Last visited

  • Days Won

    32

Posts posted by Cubit

  1. Hi Cubit,

     

    Thanks for the reply.  I guess I was concerned that if the LED's flash all the time, then it may signal a potential intruder that the system is dummy, as it could represent a 'live' system, even if the property is clearly occupied.

     

    Given you have confirmed that LED's must always flash, then that is fine.  All new systems going in now will have to follow this regulation.

     

    Out of interest, can there be no LED's flashing, and then just the strobe when set off?

    Not convinced you're reading the replies correctly.

    The LEDS are optional/not compulsory. But, if you have them on, they stay on, set or unset.

     

    Their purpose is a bit of a gimmick, feelgood factor, that type of thing. Helps show in the dark that the premises have/pretends to have an alarm.

  2. Hi thanks for the reply.

     

    So are you saying that the LED's are not allowed to flash constantly?

     

    They have indicated that their system has continuous flashing LED's (even if system off, e.g. house is occupied) and then when the alarm is triggered the strobe lights flash.

    EWD (bellbox) leds are allowed to flash constantly.

    What you don't do is have them indicate set or unset.

    eg, only flashing when the panel is set.

     

    The leds are seperate to the strobe, which can/is programmed for different options.

  3. I must confess, prior to the current venture did much the same at the expense of being with the family. Now my girls nearly 12, I regret that. Cards in and time off would have done nicely in hindsight.

    Those of you here that are either self employed or directors, could you ever go back to employment? I couldn't even if I was offered the same money I get now with all the greif.

    There are jobs cards in that can take over your life without you realising too.

  4. I don't recall any point where I haven't given enough evidence to back up a claim about a specific product. If I haven't named the product, it is because the manufacturer has made it clear they would be interested in legal action, so I need to be careful.

    The system that I didn't name that I don't think is good, I provided a document describing a similar system, and asked you to make your own conclusions. Open up a Scantronic wireless panel, look at that document, compare the radio modules, make your own judgement.

    I don't know. I'd question the use of the word "encryption" under trading standards.

    If your signalling system claimed it was encrypted and it turned out to be as weak as this, would that not be of concern?

    Your constant play on words, inferences, claims suggesting you are the 'good guy' etc etc are misleading. The easily led fall for it, not i.

    I'm out!!

  5. How do I change that though? I've looked at a good few systems, enough that I can form an opinion of where they lie in terms of security. I've posted information on why I think the bad products are bad, some of which has been in quite a lot of depth. I can go into more depth, but as many have said, it would be beyond them.

    I can argue that installers aren't in possession of all the facts - there are alarm systems that fall far short of the marketing.

    The problem is that, and it is entirely your call, you only release some information whilst alluding to other products (unnamed) either having problems or inferring that they do.

    This is very misleading to the public in general and to those amongst us who are quick to castigate a product (or company) but then do a 360 degree turn based on something they read on the web without being able to validate the new 'facts'.

    Technically it's not encryption either. So, on a marketing and technical level, it's pretty bad.

     

    But is it illegal? No.

    Is it factually incorrect? i'd say no because no specifics mentioned.

     

    In effect, no different to the bull put out by any other company or business.

  6. I don't think I have said that one brand is secure really, just my impression of it is better than others. Is it any different to an installer saying they prefer Texecom over Honeywell?

    And therein lies the problem.

    Matt has formed a view that you did and duly posted.

    He has form for castigating a product in preference to another even when he may not be in possession of all the facts.

    Preference of one brand over another without starting why is not the same argument.

  7. You make a good point, technistore brag on their website of military grade encryption. If the technistore decoder is military grade and it took you 5 mins to work it out, doesn't say much for military grade.

    Question.

    What does military grade actually mean?

  8. The seed codes are reasonably common knowledge. I think most engineers know a few just by where they have worked and engineers they know in other companies. If cg had bad intentions, he could simply write a list of them and generate a little web page for customers to reset their own alarms and the fact he can is the frightening bit, exposing a system that isn't very secure which I believe was the whole point of his blog in the first place. We have all seen websites appear to assist the consumer getting around things such as sayno20870 etc, why should we be immune from customers trying to save a few quid and reset their own alarms and avoid the engineer call out fee? We should have a better system that stops them being able to.

    One of the problems with what he's doing is it doesn't give a true reflection of products in general.

    Mentioning one brand/product specifically as secure whilst suggesting others that remained unnamed gives those who don't understand a false view.

    In effect, a potentially false but damaging reputation.

  9. After spending the last few days working in Glasgow I was expecting a total nightmare.

    TBH what a surprise, went out in the city for a meal and a few beers and it was far from what I thought it would be.

    I would 100% rather work in Glasgow than London.

    I like Glasgow, great city and, like you say, far better than the sink city we have as an embarrassing capital.
  10. What is becoming clear.

    And I know for a fact is............................

    You northern sprats come here and under cut us then moan when you have to do the service/additions and or wotever.

    Then moan about the prices to work here.

    Happy to pay **** all if you can manage it and spend £200 to save £40

    Toss ers

    Dress it up how you like, London is a sh1t hole.

    And an overpriced one at that.

×
×
  • Create New...

Important Information

By using this site, you agree to our Terms of Use.