james.wilson

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.

Lol

Its been a while since my last blog. My last blog was on direction and position for us as an industry and those involved in it. Nothing has changed imo from that entry. Today id like to talk about more basic things. Things we do day to day, regulations we operate under etc. On the approved side we have various rules and regulations we must all operate within. If we risk asses a site as needing, or we are requested to design a system that requires a police response then we do. Currently if a security system is going to call the police (granted i accept that arc's etc are involved in this process) then it needs to comply with various regulations. This includes the current EN 50131 reg in force, it also demands BS 8243 (there are others) Using BS8243 as an example this requires we install and configure systems in a certain way. The main reason for this standard is to reduce the number of 'false' alarms we pass to the police regardless of cause. This is for intruder detection as well as personal attack systems (I&HAS). From a security point of view most systems are configured for sequential confirmation. That is 2 or more detectors located off the entry route must activate before a call is passed to the police. This is relatively easy to achieve as long as we design a system with adequate detection. ie 1 sensor per room is rarely sufficient as a single detector activating on a genuine break in will not result in the police being called. Ideally all we need to do is add additional protection to these areas and we have the desired more than 1 detector activating. This is harder to achieve safely with regard to panic attack. As it was a user under attack could press a double push panic button safe in the knowledge that this would be passed to the police and assistance was on its way. This is changing as we know and we now have confirmation of PA. This requires in its simplest form a different PA button. One you have to press in a certain way, in certain positions to get the desired effect. So we have a basic position where to comply and achieve a police calling system you need (as an end user) a company that is inspected by a UKAS accredited inspectorate (currently NSI and SSAIB), you need a system designed to comply with the current legislation that does all it can to reduce or remove false alarms at the expense of possibly missing genuine ones. You need to play the police to activate your URN (ie your premisis to allow the alarm to even be passed to the police). You need to control the number of alarms you generate. If you have 3 false alarms in a rolling 12 month period and the 4th is genuine then the police can refuse to attend. All these alarms from complaint companies are monitored and checked statistically. If the false alarm rate of your provider is higher than the average they will be removed from calling the police. There are many reasons why a company might want to not pass alarms on to the police. Is this really what we are trying to achieve. Are we ignoring what the end users expectation is of an approved system? On the flip side there are firms that provide a non approved, non regulated police response. They can use police cars and the word police calling on their marketing. They will pass any call from an alarm onto the police via the 999 system without any URN and using the correct wording will get the police to attend. Does this not make type A systems (ie approved) 2nd class. They are considerably cheaper to install and run. They dont need servicing, they dont need an on call engineer, they dont need to be complaint to any regulations, they dont need a URN or police tax, they dont need etc etc etc. Are we loosing sight of what we should be doing and protecting?

4 yrs old it may be shot. Without a tester it will be difficult, but use your dvm and pull the mains from the panel and monitor the voltage at 10 minute intervals for an hor or so. That will tell you if its duff. Plus your charge current seems high for a fully charged battery again maaking me suspect its failing

The only way to stop them is to fix the issue. How old is the battery, when was it last serviced etc. You can't test a battery on voltage alone

huh? awkward but leaking?

I might make a few changes lol

It looks a little more advanced than mine. Ill dig out the code on mine and upload it

Maybe i didnt upload it ill have a look

i write stuff. im glad it was useful.

your welcome

Joe can you create one in trade on the subject. I have spoken at length to Tony weeks and that is not how I understand nsi position

It was a while ago too.

Lps 1277 is for all signalling products. Not just ip

Gus mentioned using keypads for advertising many years ago on here. I think that many in the industry can use this and more to reduce initial cost to the end user. However i dont think currently its a starter. The problem with using a security based appliance as an advertising front end is the lack of time spent with it. IF we were to catch up and be at the forefront of automation, energy saving etc then the security system 'could' be the portal used to access this infomation. Unfortunatly the industry is still managed by the old school and do not understand there is any need for revolution. Joe, can you get your crowd back into the BSIA and get yourself on a committee or 2?

J, Very interesting, and covers a lot more than your direct interest. Im assuming you think the final mile (ie the arc) is an easier attack point if its known than the individual site/system. To minimise the exposed footprint from send point to recieve point what would you suggest? Private circuits or VPN's. From the transmission point of view its easier to attack the fixed line (pstn) side than anything else but also the gsm side can be vulnerable. Id of thought that any high grade system based on regular polling would be immune to the reporting (not the attack) but if using an ATS 5 device if the device was attacked this would be shown in less than 3 minutes. However if the end that handles that reporting is attacked what would happen then? I assume a DOS style attack on an ARC would be more effective if it swamped it with false signals. The more i think about it the more it seems the arc is the most effective attack point? James

If I recall the galaxy slate ones should be fine

that could be useful. but id want it cover more than signalling how far does that go?

Axis do courses. You could look into that

thanks fr the follow, good job you have decent stuff it could of fried it.

As above I wouldn't put it on high and you need the jumpers set for double pole mode

No as it coundnt work. I have seen specialist cameras that spin an outer some to repel water. But if its an issue you need a camera with a flat glass to use a wiper.

anytime