james.wilson

agreed, all it prevents is resetting. Granted its not perfect but id say your work on rf integrity and ats etc is far more valuable. But I guess this is what interested you?

or cg?

agreed but unfair to compare to modern security requirements was all I was meaning

old panel though now

wow, useless point scored there for the ats

ok 0-255?

Well depends. If using modems then we use dial back and they call the office, either from a remote request or the customer pressing the relevant buttons. On the higher security stuff we use webways and the data is sent over an ssh tunnel.

but again technistore is just a reset algo. There are easy ways to reset a system than to hack it. It was originally a separate device that wired into the panel. It was then later added to panels as a built in function. Most panels don't even have a seed, ie castle, aritech etc. If you get hold of the software you can reset any panel. Im not a fan of it and once we have all of our estate on udl we will be disabling it.

I remember on the radio Río you adressed it and enabled upto 4 rios. That was done via a keypad connected to the rio. how is it done an the dimension. Plus at what firmware did it supports portals?

never used a portal on a g3. But if its the same as the g2, you will need to get the serial number into the circuit you are using.

Goncall i don't see an issue with anything mr g is doing. If ive missed ought let me know Ps feel free to go on strike.

Not related to you in anyway ade so you can miss the read.

for all the right reasons though

Agreed. If something has a weakness i want to know, then there are 2 options 1 discuss the issue and get a resolution. 2 if 1 doesn't work change product

lol Id worry about the rf and signalling first

which dog?

It is potentially an issue but bear in mind this is used just to reset the system. No menu access can be gained with it so its not a security risk Imo.

I didnt think so but there is obviously a difference of opinion and im wondering why

There has been a thread here about this. I thought it better to create a seperate thread to debate this as there is obviously a difference of opinion. It is my position that fire cables DO need to be seperate or segregated from all other circuits. From BS5839 The belief that 7671 overides in this area appears to be incorrect. As it IMO only applies to the incoming power supply cable not the elv cables Another Quote and Seems pretty clear that if it is not segregated its a variation and must be noted as such

Best answer would be best imo

Jumped into this late. Oxo calm down please. Bypassing the bed isn't on and I think some of the content is over the mark. You dont have to keep making the same point over and over. I'll have a look at cleaning it up when on a pc. I will also have to look at who needs to be trade only

securex? oh no thats gone too

can i pay you to go lol

id guess thats why ifsec thinks a forum is a good idea, just before the event. Its a busy event but its no longer an installer event

so dying moves of ifsec? be a shame but its more an end user event now. not much use to me. i like to go but only to say hello etc. i dont go to find new stuff.