Jump to content
Security Installer Community

james.wilson

Admin
 View Profile  See their activity

  • Posts

    30,639

  • Joined

  • Last visited

  • Days Won

    287

 Content Type 

Everything posted by james.wilson

  1. james.wilson
    Well I don't know if its red gsm then its about tight, if its Dualcom grade 2 then its a little steep.
  2. james.wilson
    But its not just monitoring you are paying for. I'm assuming you have a support and maintenance contract as well as your Redcare fees?
  3. james.wilson
    it also feels cheap in use. madness imo for the bit the client uses every day to feel cheap as the assuption is all of it. I know it is cheap, but shouldnt feel it imo
  4. james.wilson
    Hello
  5. james.wilson
    question? Those that do port forward to an insecure device. If that device is used to gain access or rip a client off, who is liable? The client for allowing access to their router, the manufacturer for weak security or the installer for bypassing the security of the so called 'firewall'?
  6. james.wilson
    the ********** on the display is showing the keypad has power but cannot communicate with the panel. So its either a cable problem or the panel is dead. Pressing esc on the keypad will stop the beep while the ******** are displayed but only at the keypad. If the system is in alarm it will need a code / prox to silence and the requires the keypad to be communicating with the panel.
  7. james.wilson
    I'm sorry I thought you meant new freq for us. Well I believe so but id guess at it being sometime away.
  8. james.wilson
    That's a loss of comms. Use your support contract and get someone out tonight.
  9. james.wilson
    Why?
  10. james.wilson
    yes
  11. james.wilson
    How much other gear is insecure?
  12. james.wilson
    Al the units tested are gprs pstn. If you think pstn is secure then id suggest you look at the dtmf protocol. Question. Would you fit gear with a security question mark over it?
  13. james.wilson
    Where you getting the firmware file from?
  14. james.wilson
    Al this is imo far more serious than anyone getting the pins wrong. Anyone has the right to assume what they fit will do the job and won't be compromised. Grade 2 who cares its low risk. G3 and above is different. I'm interested in nova's comment that the loss would be down to the arc, I don't see that as the arc didn't certify compliance the installer does. We assume the chain complies when the cert is issued. I'm seriously concerned about this and like the vw thing doubt its just one.
  15. james.wilson
    get of the fence adi, say what you really mean
  16. james.wilson
    didnt know it was posted elsewhere http://www.diynot.com/diy/threads/csl-dualcom-cs2300-r-vulnerabilities.447125/
  17. james.wilson
    the vpn bit from what i read is very last mile. Its not end to end. Plus i believe alarm delivery and polling are different routes so polling imo does not prove path availability for alarm transmission. ie some use the same path end to end to poll and deliver alarms.
  18. james.wilson
    the tests by cg cast doubt on that.
  19. james.wilson
    http://www.thesecurityinstaller.co.uk/community/topic/32716-dual-path-signalling-devices-dual-path-failure-reporting-times/
  20. james.wilson
    yes
  21. james.wilson
    Im also surprised there hasn't been a response from csl on this. I was personally contacted after my videos of Dualcom vs, Redcare, vs webway.
  22. james.wilson
    Surprised as such maintainers will be liable that it isn't a busier topic. My take is that I needed to remove them. Seems a lot of firms don't care that they are fitting very insecure devices.
  23. james.wilson
    Be interesting if that's just 100 affected units? Can't agree that its a round 600 units affected. That is imo bullsh1t Is that grade 3 units, or gradeshift grade 4 Most end users won't know, care or give one as their insurer will come back on the maintainer. I wonder what the insurers think on this. As usual the insurers will ask for Dualcom plus
  24. james.wilson
    So as of April 2015 your findings are valid?
  25. james.wilson
    So 2013 firmware was in your report?
×
×
  • Create New...

Important Information

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

  I accept