Guest sprog Posted November 13, 2006 Posted November 13, 2006 So why do you need an alarm?Would it be to deter or stop someone gaining entry to your house and ensuring that they didnt have enough time to remove your computer, take your bank documents/cards and pin numbers, take your car keys and then your car and remove your safe. A dummy box would achieve this in most cases. The use of an alarm for me personally is one to make sure the entire street wakes up when someone breaks in (increasing the chance for witnesses and scaring the living **** out of a burglar) and secondly, to let me know by SMS/E-Mail that someone has triggered the alarm. I don't think using your pin code to your bank account is really a comparison.And this is pertenent to Engineer codes because? Someone can do a lot more damage with a bank PIN number than an alarm code. So why do banks trust people with their own money?How can you say security products are not secure enough, what do you have to back up this statement? Firstly the fact that I being a complete alarm novice was able to breach my home alarm security completely with only a circuit board reference in under 3 minutes. Secondly the impression certain people are passing across that releasing Engineer schematics or codes to individuals will somehow breach the security of the system. My point here is: If you trust someone with the disarm code to completely disable their alarm system, why not trust them with the Engineer code to modify said system as per their changing requirements. The only reason I can see is so Engineers can charge for a callout when someone wants to redecorate a room or replace a window!
Chorlton Posted November 13, 2006 Posted November 13, 2006 A dummy box would achieve this in most cases. The use of an alarm for me personally is one to make sure the entire street wakes up when someone breaks in (increasing the chance for witnesses and scaring the living **** out of a burglar) and secondly, to let me know by SMS/E-Mail that someone has triggered the alarm.And this is pertenent to Engineer codes because? Someone can do a lot more damage with a bank PIN number than an alarm code. So why do banks trust people with their own money? Firstly the fact that I being a complete alarm novice was able to breach my home alarm security completely with only a circuit board reference in under 3 minutes. Secondly the impression certain people are passing across that releasing Engineer schematics or codes to individuals will somehow breach the security of the system. My point here is: If you trust someone with the disarm code to completely disable their alarm system, why not trust them with the Engineer code to modify said system as per their changing requirements. The only reason I can see is so Engineers can charge for a callout when someone wants to redecorate a room or replace a window! You are entitled to your own opinion and have freely expressed it. What do you now hope to achieve with your further explanation bearing in mind the forum rule ("We do not give out Alarm Engineer/Installer manuals, to avoid offence please do not ask us to supply them") was displayed prior to your posts? Chris.
Guest Posted November 13, 2006 Posted November 13, 2006 oh look another plonker who knows better...... Someone can do a lot more damage with a bank PIN number than an alarm code. So why do banks trust people with their own money? PIN code access level like a users code Engineer Code access like the staff of the bank eg cancel your pin order you new one close your a/c if you misuse it Firstly the fact that I being a complete alarm novice was able to breach my home alarm security completely with only a circuit board reference in under 3 minutes. I can fit you a REAL alarm....... My point here is: If you trust someone with the disarm code to completely disable their alarm system you code does not disarm 100% why not trust them with the Engineer code to modify said system as per their changing requirements. you have an idea what your are doing? The only reason I can see is so Engineers can charge for a callout when someone wants to redecorate a room or replace a window! the "nasty alarm company" does not want any plonker to balls the job up, so if the client is unlucky to be robbed the alarm will work.......
magpye Posted November 13, 2006 Posted November 13, 2006 What an interesting debate.I run a technical engineering consultancy firm. We provide custom electronic and computerised solutions to a range of clients. Recent projects include a self navigating autonomous baloon for meterological studies, and giving consultancy services on satellite control systems. Our work also includes technical and network support as well as IT security penetration tests and auditing. Due to the wide variety of work we undertake, having the appropriate documentation is always required. For example, the baloon project. Our first step was to document the users requirements. This took some time, but at the end, a nice document pack was available. The next step was to design and program the hardware, create the prototype PCB's and test at the component level. Finally, field testing was completed and the project delivered. The customer received: Specification Document, User Manual, Technical Manual (including commented code listings and PCB designs), and a "Tech Pack". The tech pack contained all information on components used, camera details, GPS receiver specification and reference, sensor datasheets, microprocessor data etc right down to the individual resistors and reliability statistics on them. Could we have held back on the documentation? Could they take them to a competitor for a support contract? Probably. Possibly. But to be quite frank, we're confident enough of the service and experience we provide our customers that we rely partly on the provision of information as a means of generating customer trust. Now, on the more appropriate topic of Alarm systems. I recently moved into a property which was protected by an alarm system. I came here looking for support and was basically told "call an engineer out". My, that's helpful! I could have found that out by looking at my Yellow Pages! As usual, google came to the rescue. It was just a case of entering the right search parameters, and BAM, a nice PDF detailing everything I ever wanted to know about my system. I follow the instructions, pop off the cover and there under it is another copy of the engineers manual! Reprogrammed the system, set it up how I wanted, moved the door sensor and bobs my uncle! However, even asking for help got a thread locked and the responses by some left a slightly bitter taste. Bottom line is that a system is in my home. The system is my property and I have a right to know how to use it. I own a water dispensing fridge freezer. When the Engineer came out (under warranty) to fix the Ice maker so it filled up all the trays instead of just 1, he was kind enough to explain how he did it. There's a combination of buttons that adjusts how long the tap runs to fill the tray! Now, if my fridge popped a gasket, or I wanted it altered with "extra cooling", I'd call up an Engineer and pay him to sort it out. But if I just want to change how long the water runs, I know the codes to do it. Programming an alarm system isn't rocket science. It's a very simple procedure that requires a code number and a menu showing what the options are. I want extra sensors? I'll call up an Engineer to fit them. I want to change my user code? Or move an existing sensor for redecorating? I'm well within my rights to do that without wasting my money just because someone knows the "code" that I don't... If I balls it up, I'll call out a service engineer and get charged more than if I just got the engineer out in the first place - there's nothing wrong with that. I accept that. But I fail to understand the big fear about supplying the manuals to the general public. Are people so worried that they'll loose work? Perhaps it'll even encourage some lazy manufacturers to make products that are a little less easy to circumvent... Sorry for the long post, just wanted to show exactly where I'm coming from. Just another point, we have to work to 'Standards', one of these, British Standard PD6662 dictates that only engineers can access engineering Permitting a user to access engineering breaks regulations This is of course when a professional installation has been done, a Destroy It Yourself one is not governed by our 'Standards' - do what you like Someone told me I was ignorant and apathetic, I don't know what that means, nor do I care.
Guest sprog Posted November 13, 2006 Posted November 13, 2006 oh look another plonker who knows better...... PIN code access level like a users code Engineer Code access like the staff of the bank eg cancel your pin order you new one close your a/c if you misuse it I can fit you a REAL alarm....... you code does not disarm 100% you have an idea what your are doing? the "nasty alarm company" does not want any plonker to balls the job up, so if the client is unlucky to be robbed the alarm will work....... Firstly, let's try and be adult enough to state opinions without resorting to namecalling. I thought we were all adults here. My code may not disarm 100%, I can still trigger tamper switches and whatnot by moving a sensor or snipping a wire, but it does disarm enough for someone to burgle my house which is what my initial post was responding to. You've taken the answer out of context. And while not an expert in the field, I believe I have enough knowledge of what I am doing to use the engineer code to disable and reprogram my system from a factory reset. In fact I just did that today and amonst the changes adjusted my exit timer from 10 minutes to an exit path trigger. Much more efficient. And (chris & alarm guard) I was under the impression that the "runner" of these forums had started this topic for precisely this discussion. And just to clarify here, I wouldn't tamper with a system under contract. It's for exactly this reason that one pays a company a monthly/annual fee to maintain a system! I'm referring to out of contract systems. It's simply arrogant to presume that every user out there is going to "balls up the system". Heck, I've seen so called professionals in many fields make a "//.B.W.F.// up" because they thought they knew their job better than they did. It is actually possible, for a "non-trade" person to be skilled enough to look after their own system. Anyways, evidently a sensible debate on this topic is not possible which leads me to wonder why the thread has been left open for discussion. I've said my piece. I'm evidently outnumbered here so I'll give it a rest.
james.wilson Posted November 13, 2006 Posted November 13, 2006 i think we have agreed before that engineer access to out of contract systems is fine. The problem i and many others have is people wanting engineer access and guidance how to use it. If you want tyo mess with your own alarm then that is your choice if its out of contract. PS do you let users 'who think they know' loose with an root password in your profession But as has been said before enginner access or manuals or defaulting info etc is not given in the public forums, not to stop you doing what you want but for the glaringly obvious reason. securitywarehouse Security Supplies from Security Warehouse Trade Members please contact us for your TSI vetted trade discount.
Guest sprog Posted November 13, 2006 Posted November 13, 2006 i think we have agreed before that engineer access to out of contract systems is fine. The problem i and many others have is people wanting engineer access and guidance how to use it. If you want tyo mess with your own alarm then that is your choice if its out of contract. PS do you let users 'who think they know' loose with an root password in your profession Gah, said I wasn't going to post anymore here! Agree with your post re: contract and out of contract systems. Also agree that a user should be entitled to the engineer manual and code for an out of contract system - but not expect alarm engineers to provide free guidance if they are unable to follow the manual. You either know how to do it, or pay someone who does. No free lunches in this regard But yes, I do let users have the root password if they own (or the company when company based) the system. Actually I even do this if I'm providing a support contract.
james.wilson Posted November 13, 2006 Posted November 13, 2006 lol your a brave man then! securitywarehouse Security Supplies from Security Warehouse Trade Members please contact us for your TSI vetted trade discount.
Guest sprog Posted November 13, 2006 Posted November 13, 2006 lol your a brave man then! Heh, probably about 25% of my work is network tech support and consultancy. In 15 odd years of doing it I've never contemplated not supplying all passwords. In fact I usually spend a good portion of my time explaining exactly what I've fixed and training staff so if it happens again, they can fix it themselves! Thinking about it, I guess that is pretty brave...
Guest Director of COP Security Posted November 13, 2006 Posted November 13, 2006 Daft question and I must be missing something here, but what difference does having an engineer manual make if:- a: The default codes have been changed. If the system is under contract then the end used will not be able to use the manual if the codes have been changed. b: The end used can not understand them. If a system is out of contract and the end user defaults the system, and then tries to reprogram it and fails, then surly it
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.