pineapplecurlingswan Posted October 28, 2023 Posted October 28, 2023 I wanted to come up with a privacy solution for having CCTV in the home and back garden that possibly captures more of me than ARC staff care to see. I wouldn’t mind being seen in any state, during an emergency such as PA triggered or intruder at night, but generally prefer the cameras not to be viewable. My solution was fairly simple and didn’t require any expensive equipment. On arm (day or night) or panic, an output switches a relay. The relay powers a low powered Ethernet switch that provides a connection from the DVR’s second LAN output through to a Ubiquiti router. A firewall rule only allows external traffic to that second LAN port, thus if not powered, not accessible. I can continue to access cameras 24/7 via the VPN to home or internally. The DVR remains powered 24/7, the switch is unmanaged and basic, helping to ensure it is fully operational within 20 seconds approx. I did consider a contactor of sorts, to actually connect all 8 cores of a single cable between the router and the DVR. Cost was a big factor, with a 4-pole contactor costing around £38-£40 and needing 2 of them. Additionally, breaking out the Cat6, shielding, untwisting, wiring into the contactor etc... gave way to interference. I doubt it would have caused issues of a short distance, but the switch solution required no modification and allowed full shielding of RJ45 plugs and sockets. I don’t have many hang-ups but I do value privacy somewhat. I wanted to ensure it wasn’t possible for the ARC to view CCTV without a need, especially since I enjoy the hot tub I built in the garden. The solution also gives me control that if friends visiting the Garden of England to use my hot tub via the side gate, I can be sure of their privacy despite the alarm being armed and cameras usually visible by the ARC. Does anything think I could have done something simpler or has anyone got their own solution they use? NB: I trust the ARC not to view cameras when there is no need, and to log when they are viewed, but this also protects against breaches from skilled actors. Quote "Passwords are like underwear. Don't let people see it, change it very often, and you shouldn't share it with strangers."
sixwheeledbeast Posted October 28, 2023 Posted October 28, 2023 Depends on the kit... If the system is still recording they'll need to have playback access anyway to check on alarms. Disconnecting cameras would trigger video loss alarms, if the system is missing if they check on it they may think there is a fault. Your also adding a single point of failure to the system. The most sensible solution would be a privacy mask on the cameras triggered by I/O. Quote
pineapplecurlingswan Posted October 28, 2023 Author Posted October 28, 2023 I'm not disconnecting cameras. I have 2 LAN connections to the DVR, one of those is being disconnected. No missing feed alarms at all. The ARC also know there is a 30 second delay for cameras to be active, but it takes them just as long to get the feed anyway. There's no single point of failure to the system. Although I will at exploring a mask via a contact closure, I'm fine with the cameras viewed when I want them viewed. Do you worry about privacy in residential situations? Quote "Passwords are like underwear. Don't let people see it, change it very often, and you shouldn't share it with strangers."
sixwheeledbeast Posted October 28, 2023 Posted October 28, 2023 I know my point being, disconnecting the cameras is an issue or disconnecting the network could be an issue; I don't see them as suitable options. It's all down to the kit, I know some kit would completely fail setup like this. If the switch doesn't come up you have no video. Your then relying on the intruder I'd assume. A normal ARC CCTV system would be self contained and have alarms per camera themselves. This seems like video confirmation but your covering areas outside the intruder... Possibly a bit pointless all this ARC CCTV stuff in the way it's implemented to get police response anyway? Anyway hard to say as we don't know the full details of the systems but removing power from equipment is never a reliable solution. You have no way to prove the equipment is up or will come up when you need it. I don't worry but I have concerns and to my best to protect my security and privacy but everyone is different. Many seem to be happy telling everyone what amazing meal they're having on holiday via social media... Quote
james.wilson Posted October 28, 2023 Posted October 28, 2023 Agree with 6 above. Regarding cams use ones that dont have a cloud etc access. It's amazing that all the Internet reviews only use consumer crap not real pro stuff. I need to start selling anything then add a pro to the name. I'd be cautious of hik and Duhua without limiting it's access tbh. There is a open source firmware project for cams that you can reflash Quote securitywarehouse Security Supplies from Security Warehouse Trade Members please contact us for your TSI vetted trade discount.
james.wilson Posted October 28, 2023 Posted October 28, 2023 I'd say local only stuff will be a future but not yet most people want stuff to work without worrying or thinking about anything else. Once their systems they don't care about show when they are out, not close to home and giving pattens to their movement that will change. Quote securitywarehouse Security Supplies from Security Warehouse Trade Members please contact us for your TSI vetted trade discount.
PeterJames Posted November 3, 2023 Posted November 3, 2023 If your recorder has it you can also arm/disarm remote viewing from an input like say your intruder alarm, this would be overridden if a 24hr device activated like PA. This way the ARC only have access when the system is armed you can automate the arming using an output on the intruder so when set or part set the CCTV is armed when the intruder system is disarmed so is the CCTV Quote
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.