Well yeah, you are putting it outside the firewall which makes it easier to compromise but then it can't be used to pivot on to the network, in a domestic situation anyway.

I wouldn't recommend it but it's an option on lower end routers.

 

3 hours ago, james.wilson said:

dmz is worst case on most routers?

id say most customers don't care as long as it works.... Trying to explain the reasons why make you the over charging numpty who charged for stuff that wasn't needed 

 

What about the alarm being attacked though?  What do the installers do then ?

 

More and more panels are being placed on-line with the use of phone apps connecting to open ports.

Sign on the dotted line that the installer is not responsible for any issues that may occur from port forwarding?

 

In reality the customer will rarely pay for a high end router. So you are left with a crap ISP one, ISP's will not support anything that is not there own to end users. Then most alarm companies don't want to take responsibility for service of the router.

It's a bit of a tricky situation TBH, on a commercial site you can leave the responsibility to an IT dept or install your own service for your kit. Domestic is very different when consumers needs at a cost overrule security.

 

I had a customer specifically ask for LAN use only the other day, due to not trusting remote access. I don't blame him but this is a first for me, most have no idea.