In response to Bernard Green

[cybergibbons]

You mean those two points of yours aren't your opinion?

What are they then?

the two points I showed, are yours, not mine.

You have made it clear that

1) you believe criminals might start doing it one day

2) you approve of publishing information purporting to educate on how to commit crime.

They aren't my points, and if you say they are, you are either lying or delusional. You don't seem to have anything useful to add, so bye for now.

 

[cybergibbons]

You may be revealing information that a prospective criminal does not already know. In that instance you could be arming that criminal to commit a crime he would not otherwise have done or known how to do.

Why do you assume he doesn't have any other means of finding this out? Why is this different to a video about lock picking?

Here you will argue that its common knowledge and public domain and if indeed it is so why do you feel the need to accelerate it's spread.

Not sure why you have said this, I think my work on alarm systems is pretty ground-breaking. I've not seen anyone else recover encryption keys from locked microcontrollers in alarm systems before. So, it's not common knowledge at all.

If its for the so called benefit of wireless alarm users , You are too late they already have their systems installed except now someone is actively seeking to spread information on how to defeat them.

I can prevent market share going to companies who continue to produce insecure systems.

I think all alarm systems should allow firmware upgrades to patch vulnerabilities. My computer, phone, camera, car and even some of my child's toys allow firmware upgrades. It seems really backwards to not allow the same in a system which has security as it's goal.

Lets say burglar Bill gets arrested and he has used a jammer...where did you get it... Oh it was on DIYnot. Loads of information about how to use them... I thought they were legal...

Do you really think DIYnot want to be dragged into a legal case or be held accountable for hosting sensitive information?

The information will be out there at the end of a google search. It's just a futile attempt to cover it up.

 

[toooluk]

Do you really think DIYnot want to be dragged into a legal case or be held accountable for hosting sensitive information?

Can you please explain how this would work?

 

[Europlex]

 

[cybergibbons]

I think you are missing the point.

Consumers can buy good and bad equipment for similar prices. The bad stuff is really bad. People should know how bad.

The same issues these ungraded alarms have extend through to the higher grades of wired alarms.

 

[JohnD]

I think it should be published in the open.

Just because something hasn't happened in the past doesn't mean it never will.

1) you believe criminals might start doing it one day

2) you approve of publishing information purporting to educate on how to commit crime.

both true then.

 

[cybergibbons]

The new post notification I just got must be the result of JohnD copying and pasting the same crap again.

 

[denso13]

This might be what you missed

I think it should be published in the open.

Just because something hasn't happened in the past doesn't mean it never will.

1) you believe criminals might start doing it one day

2) you approve of publishing information purporting to educate on how to commit crime.

both true then.

 

[cybergibbons]

This might be what you missed

I think it should be published in the open.

Just because something hasn't happened in the past doesn't mean it never will.

1) you believe criminals might start doing it one day

2) you approve of publishing information purporting to educate on how to commit crime.

both true then.

Oh, cheers, seems my guess was right then.

 

[mdf290]

Odd isn't it.
When your favoured brand of toot is ridiculed by the trade for being as week as a sieve, you get on your donkey and defend it to the hilt claiming no such weakness exists.
Yet, when someone comes along to show you are wrong you suddenly want them censored.
What's up. Your business plan suddenly worthless?

As i said earlier, there's a difference in showing it being done and how to do it.

The poster is saying all wireless systems are toot including your graded systems and then spreading information about their vunerabilities.

Europlex understands the issue here , you are missing the point.

Everything being said applies to ALL wireless systems and presuming you have fitted some you too should be taking the same stance as Europlex.

A major diatribe was all about Honeywell systems...

 

[alumni]

The poster is saying all wireless systems are toot including your graded systems and then spreading information about their vunerabilities.

Europlex understands the issue here , you are missing the point.

Everything being said applies to ALL wireless systems and presuming you have fitted some you too should be taking the same stance as Europlex.

A major diatribe was all about Honeywell systems...

Not the way i've read it, nor his blogs.

 

[cybergibbons]

The poster is saying all wireless systems are toot including your graded systems and then spreading information about their vunerabilities.

Am I "the poster"?

Jamming is hard to protect against, but there are systems that make it difficult to do.

Good systems also make other attacks hard.

Companies like Texecom and Pyronix have actually improved their systems in the last 10 years.

A major diatribe was all about Honeywell systems...

What diatribe is this?

 

[mattylad]

From my experience burglars dont give a hoots what the alarm system is, they kick the front door in and burgle.
The police just do not turn up in enough time.

 

[cybergibbons]

From my experience burglars dont give a hoots what the alarm system is, they kick the front door in and burgle.

The following user says thank you to mattylad for this useful post:
mdf290 (today)

Right. So the guy installing alarms thanks the person saying they are pointless. mdf290, you are an enigma.

 

[mdf290]

Right. So the guy installing alarms thanks the person saying they are pointless. mdf290, you are an enigma.

An alarm ANY alarm does 95% of its work simply by having a visible bell box whether the alarm works or not.

This is because 85% of burglars avoid homes with alarms fitted.

When it comes to a home being burgled , if the thieves decide they want something and have planned ahead there are many routes open for them.
If they fancy the car in the drive they can simply sneak in the kitchen door when everyone is at home and grab the keys from the worktop.
Best alarm in the world wont stop that happening. Good alarm design and zoning can though. Chime on the door for example.

When you get to the stage you are relying on the alarm going off if a burglary happens then for that to be effective the homeowner needs to be at home and capable of overpowering or chasing off the burglar or the alarm needs a response from the Police within 1 minute. I say 1 minute as that is how fast most burglaries can happen.
The days of lugging flat screen TVs down the road are gone when an iPhone fits in a pocket and can be sold on for £100

Your position assumes that the alarm working is the be all and end all of an alarms use. You make the incorrect assumption that if it can be jammed or has vunerabilities people should be warned because it is rubbish. You then go on to say so is everything else but CRUCIALLY you don't offer any suggestion as to what IS an invunerable system.
Spending £35-45 on an anti snap eurocylinder for your patio door lock will do far more to prevent a burglary than even the best and most expensive alarm in the world.
They are just glorified doorbells.
Their effect on criminals however is still as effective as ever and the opportunist thief will avoid an alarmed home.

Your strategy of just rubbishing alarms offers no solutions and can only have one outcome. The outcome of telling people that something can be easily defeated and that its easy to get a cheap device to defeat them can only have one effect.
If your stategy works people wont decide not to get a £150-300 alarm you have said is rubbish and instead spend £700 plus they will simply not have the funds and may simply decide to put off their purchase.

How will your little campaign have worked then towards public safety?

You will have denied the homeowner of the protection afforded simply by the fact that burglars avoid homes with alarms.

I cannot see any merit whatsoever in your campaign on here. You may know electronics but you have a woeful grasp of the real world. The real world that sees old ladies wanting a cheap alarm because they are on a fixed pension income and they want someone to install it because they cant climb a ladder , the real world where a homeowner might decide he doesn't want to spend much on an alarm because his finances are tight or even that it is a stopgap till he can upgrade in a couple of years.
The pro installers don't really have me as a threat to their business or shouldn't because they are dealing with graded systems and insurance requirements where the purchasers have to pay the going rate because thats the price if they require that standard.
There is a place for budget and diy alarms as Yale will tell you , they do'nt develop their products for fun they do it because there is a market for them. That market is people who cannot afford a graded alarms.

As JohnD has noted other than your bragging about your technical prowess you haven't brought anything else of note to the table.
You haven't given evidence of a burglary achieved by jamming. Even if you did the outcome may have been the same jammed or not if the burglary was planned and quick.
You are just scaremongering and trolling.
But worse. If your campaign encourages just one person to decide not to have am alarm fitted because your testimony has given them doubts you will be responsible for the ensuing burglary suffered at that home.

If 85% of burglars avoid homes with alarms then 85% of burglaries happen to homes WITHOUT alarms.