wired vs wireless alarm system

steifanc · 02-06-2009 10:28pm

oldhead wrote: »

Careful there Steifanc, you are dealing there with so called "EXPERTS" hahahahahah

i have no dough that they are "experts" I'm not trying to relieve them of there expertise,
I'm only stating the fact that wireless networks can be overcome,
I'm sure a expert alarm installer doesn't know the logic behind data encryption or transmission .

altor · 02-06-2009 10:29pm

oldhead wrote: »

he stated that a wireless system can be overcome, try and keep up there altor

read it again oldhead...

oldhead · 02-06-2009 10:30pm

koolkid wrote: »

But yet it doesnt happen..
Any facts & figures? No?

You dont know that it doesnt happen,

KoolKid · 02-06-2009 10:32pm

I know if it did I would know about it.
Still no facts or figures

oldhead · 02-06-2009 10:32pm

altor wrote: »

read it again oldhead...

i could'nt be arsed. my point from the begininng was that wireless systems can be over come, and ye said that they couldnt, dont be afraid of new techology

fred funk }{ · 02-06-2009 10:33pm

Lads enough of the handbags

Both wireless and wired have their pro's and cons. I use the Aritech wireless stuff and I am experiencing more and more problems with other radio devices interfering with the transmissions lately. Portable phones operate on the same frequency (433 Mhz) as their equipment and more stuff such as wireless door bells and domestic video senders can cause problems too.

I would go wired if it was possible for a number of reasons, the sensors are much smaller and tidier, proper wireless equipment is expensive and its also getting harder and harder to compete with Eircom. A good Engineer can normally wire a house very neatly and you would be surprised where and how cables can be hidden.

Its not always possible to wire an alarm and thats where the wireless comes in, no mess drilling the house and its installed very quickly too.

The new HKC wireless stuff will operated at a much high frequency, well out of range of the unwanted transmissions and I hear Aritechs new Panel will eventually operate at that frequency too so the wireless stuff will be much more problem free in the near future.

oldhead · 02-06-2009 10:34pm

koolkid wrote: »

I know if it did I would know about it.
Still no facts or figures

Oh so you have accessto every alarm system in The World do you

oldhead · 02-06-2009 10:36pm

fred funk }{ wrote: »

Lads enough of the handbags

Both wireless and wired have their pro's and cons. I use the Aritech wireless stuff and I am experiencing more and more problems with other radio devices interfering with the transmissions lately. Portable phones operate on the same frequency (433 Mhz) as their equipment and more stuff such as wireless door bells and domestic video senders can cause problems too.

I would go wired if it was possible for a number of reasons, the sensors are much smaller and tidier, proper wireless equipment is expensive and its also getting harder and harder to compete with Eircom. A good Engineer can normally wire a house very neatly and you would be surprised where and how cables can be hidden.

Its not always possible to wire an alarm and thats where the wireless comes in, no mess drilling the house and its installed very quickly too.

The new HKC wireless stuff will operated at a much high frequency, well out of range of the unwanted transmissions and I hear Aritechs new Panel will eventually operate at that frequency too so the wireless stuff will be much more problem free in the near future.

Cheers fred

KoolKid · 02-06-2009 10:36pm

oldhead wrote: »

dont be afraid of new techology

You dont want to use new technology yet you post not to be afraid of it?? Do you feel you are making sense here??

oldhead · 02-06-2009 10:37pm

steifanc wrote: »

i have no dough that they are "experts" I'm not trying to relieve them of there expertise,
I'm only stating the fact that wireless networks can be overcome,
I'm sure a expert alarm installer doesn't know the logic behind data encryption or transmission .

im shocked that they dont, they are "experts"

oldhead · 02-06-2009 10:39pm

koolkid wrote: »

You dont want to use new technology yet you post not to be afraid of it?? Do you feel you are making sense here??

wireless can be overcome

KoolKid · 02-06-2009 10:43pm

But you saying dont be afraid of new technology?????
Your really are contrdicting yourself...

Still no facts & figures though..
Do you honestly , (answer honestly now) believe you know better than the certification bodies who wrote the standards, the experts in the security & the insurance industry & the Guards in this matter.
If you are going to make sweeping statements that systems are less reliable & can be overcome you really need to back that up with some facts & figures. Otherwise you are just making yourself look silly.

fred funk }{ · 02-06-2009 10:44pm

oldhead wrote: »

wireless can be overcome

I have never heard of anything close to that been done/tried and I have been around in this game a while

. Thats not saying it can't be done though.
If someone wanted to get into your house that much I think it would be easier to knock on your door and put a gun to your face.

oldhead · 02-06-2009 10:51pm

koolkid wrote: »

But you saying dont be afraid of new technology?????
Your really are contrdicting yourself...

Still no facts & figures though..
Do you honestly , (answer honestly now) believe you know better than the certification bodies who wrote the standards, the experts in the security & the insurance industry & the Guards in this matter.
If you are going to make sweeping statements that systems are less reliable & can be overcome you really need to back that up with some facts & figures. Otherwise you are just making yourself look silly.

once a smartass always a smartass, wireless can be overcome, and i couldnt care less how i look, i never called myself an "EXPERT" MR. KNOW IT ALL if you ask me

KoolKid · 02-06-2009 10:54pm

Calling names really doesnt help your argument. (how childish)
You dont call yourself an expert yet you contradict those who do with no proof whatsoever.
You are obviousally right & everyone else must be wrong....:D

steifanc · 02-06-2009 11:03pm

koolkid wrote: »

But you saying don't be afraid of new technology?????
Your really are contrdicting yourself...

Still no facts & figures though..
Do you honestly , (answer honestly now) believe you know better than the certification bodies who wrote the standards, the experts in the security & the insurance industry & the Guards in this matter.
If you are going to make sweeping statements that systems are less reliable & can be overcome you really need to back that up with some facts & figures. Otherwise you are just making yourself look silly.

certification bodies, who the ISO ?
some one correct me if I'm wrong its a long time since i done quality !
the ISO model is a guideline for certification, i think its ISO that sets the requirements for certification, the company that is looking for certification sets a management model and agrees it, all ISO says is that your living up to your process model and you are being externally audited by the ISO19009 , ISO external auditing, again I'm not sure of the ISO number. so all that ISO says is you living up to what your company said you do , and the ISO are checking you.

as for you never heard of a wireless alarm being overcome, if you processed the know how to integrate your self to a wireless network , why would you bother with a house, i wouldn't think there are many burglars with degrees out there,
but the point is if someone really wanted to hijack a wireless house alarm , they could,

as for proof , search the web for convicted wireless network hackers,

oldhead · 02-06-2009 11:04pm

koolkid wrote: »

Calling names really doesnt help your argument. (how childish)
You dont call yourself an expert yet you contradict those who do with no proof whatsoever.
You are obviousally right & everyone else must be wrong....:D

Hahahahahaha give it a rest old man, i have read other threads regarding alarms and you have the same bad attitude in some of them, you always have to be right, and just a poor smartass to different users, how sad you are. Go play with wireless alarms and find out what is what.

steifanc · 02-06-2009 11:05pm

why don't you get the mod to post on the computer , or network threads
get an option from a programmer !

KoolKid · 02-06-2009 11:14pm

steifanc wrote: »

certification bodies, who the ISO ?
some one correct me if I'm wrong its a long time since i done quality !
the ISO model is a guideline for certification, i think its ISO that sets the requirements for certification, the company that is looking for certification sets a management model and agrees it, all ISO says is that your living up to your process model and you are being externally audited by the ISO , ISO external auditing, again I'm not sure of the ISO number. so all that ISO says is you living up to what your company said you do , and the ISO are checking you.

as for you never heard of a wireless alarm being overcome, if you processed the know how to integrate your self to a wireless network , why would you bother with a house, i wouldn't think there are many burglars with degrees out there,
but the point is if someone really wanted to hijack a wireless house alarm , they could,

as for proof , search the web for convicted wireless network hackers,

The Standard is EN50131 the certification bodies are NSAI etc.
The standard is a requirement not a recommendation.

altor · 02-06-2009 11:18pm

oldhead wrote: »

wireless can be overcome

they can but your alarm will activate by getting a jamming signal.. oldhead i think your way out of line here. this tread was started by a registered user looking for advice on what system to put in his house. all your contributing to this post is nothing you can back up, which to be honest is no use to anyone who wants proper advice. your the one by the way who call us experts but you still questioned everything that we have said.. at the end of the day if you want a wirefree or a wired alarm it up to you. we can only advise you here on our experience of installing both systems. yes both can be overcome if you have the knowledge and the time to do it, but that is not what we do for a living, we install the systems as designed by the manufacture to protect peoples homes and if you dont want that advice that is up to you..

steifanc · 02-06-2009 11:38pm

koolkid wrote: »

The Standard is EN50131 the certification bodies are NSAI etc.
The standard is a requirement not a recommendation.

its a requirment for certification by nasi, all standerds are recommendations,
you can install or produce a system without nasi certification,

NSAI certification is recognized world wide through a network of Mutual Recognition Agreements with other major certification bodies.

ISO 9001 has been the most popular management system standard in Ireland and internationally since it was first published in 1987 and it remains a major focus of activity. In recent years, management system standards have been introduced for the environment (ISO 14001 and I.S. 393) and health and safety (OHSAS 18001). Sector standards have been developed for food (ISO 22000 and BRC - Food and Packaging), telecommunications (TL 9000), aerospace (AS 9100 and AS 9120) and Medical Devices (ISO 13485). NSAI provides certification in each of these areas.

so nsai is an attribute to iso , falls into the same loop hole !

"they can but your alarm will activate by getting a jamming signal."
altor that would happen , there is ways around it, in signal manipulation.

as you said the user was looking for advice on what alarm to put in , IMO
both wired and wireless will suffice unless your keeping bullion in your basement

oldhead · 02-06-2009 11:41pm

altor wrote: »

they can but your alarm will activate by getting a jamming signal.. oldhead i think your way out of line here. this tread was started by a registered user looking for advice on what system to put in his house. all your contributing to this post is nothing you can back up, which to be honest is no use to anyone who wants proper advice. your the one by the way who call us experts but you still questioned everything that we have said.. at the end of the day if you want a wirefree or a wired alarm it up to you. we can only advise you here on our experience of installing both systems. yes both can be overcome if you have the knowledge and the time to do it, but that is not what we do for a living, we install the systems as designed by the manufacture to protect peoples homes and if you dont want that advice that is up to you..

Ahh correction you are once again wrong, (now why doest that suprise me) if you take the time to look back over the thread you will see that your fried KOOLKID called ye the EXPERTS,and not me, why in Gods name would i call ye experts. dont flatter yourself. my whole point to ye at the start of this thread was that a wireless system can be overcome, no more,no less. Ye said that it could not, now your saying that it can. why dont you make up your mind and obs it is up to the customer at the end of the as to what alarm they want to put in, it certainly not up to you.

oldhead · 02-06-2009 11:46pm

I think the P.S.A number is gone to their head,they seem to think it some kind of badge to be a smartass to other users

steifanc · 02-06-2009 11:48pm

just food for taught, or an analogy if you will,

if you had small kids sleeping at night, would you rather have a wired smoke alarm system or a wireless smoke alarm system ?

oldhead · 02-06-2009 11:52pm

steifanc wrote: »

just food for taught, or an analogy if you will,

if you had small kids sleeping at night, would you rather have a wired smoke alarm system or a wireless smoke alarm system ?

i would def have to go for the hard wired system, hands down, even if the cable gets burnt the alarm will still sound.

altor · 02-06-2009 11:58pm

oldhead wrote: »

Ahh correction you are once again wrong, (now why doest that suprise me) if you take the time to look back over the thread you will see that your fried KOOLKID called ye the EXPERTS,and not me, why in Gods name would i call ye experts. dont flatter yourself. my whole point to ye at the start of this thread was that a wireless system can be overcome, no more,no less. Ye said that it could not, now your saying that it can. why dont you make up your mind and obs it is up to the customer at the end of the as to what alarm they want to put in, it certainly not up to you.

point 1 oldhead your first post was about batteries having to be recharged
point 2 i never said it could not be overcome
point 3 i never called myself a expert, you did
point 4 i never said it was up to me what alarm a customer puts in there house
point 5 you where saying about a wired bell sounding better so i said put a wired bell on the wirefree panel.

altor · 03-06-2009 12:15am

steifanc wrote: »

its a requirment for certification by nasi, all standerds are recommendations,
you can install or produce a system without nasi certification,

NSAI certification is recognized world wide through a network of Mutual Recognition Agreements with other major certification bodies.

ISO 9001 has been the most popular management system standard in Ireland and internationally since it was first published in 1987 and it remains a major focus of activity. In recent years, management system standards have been introduced for the environment (ISO 14001 and I.S. 393) and health and safety (OHSAS 18001). Sector standards have been developed for food (ISO 22000 and BRC - Food and Packaging), telecommunications (TL 9000), aerospace (AS 9100 and AS 9120) and Medical Devices (ISO 13485). NSAI provides certification in each of these areas.

so nsai is an attribute to iso , falls into the same loop hole !

"they can but your alarm will activate by getting a jamming signal."
altor that would happen , there is ways around it, in signal manipulation.

as you said the user was looking for advice on what alarm to put in , IMO
both wired and wireless will suffice unless your keeping bullion in your basement

for alarms you have to be certified to standard en50131, its a requirment for certification not a recommendation, there are requirements for putting in cables for the alarm too so maybe the customer might perfer a wired system.. both systems are up to standard en50131 but running cables have to be as well. its not just a mater of walking into someones house and running cables on skerting boards like use to happen. can you show me how to manipulate the signal ? i have seen them being jammed before but not manipulated.. as i said the alarm will activate in this even of it being jammed..

oldhead · 03-06-2009 12:17am

altor wrote: »

point 1 oldhead your first post was about batteries having to be recharged
point 2 i never said it could not be overcome
point 3 i never called myself a expert, you did
point 4 i never said it was up to me what alarm a customer puts in there house
point 5 you where saying about a wired bell sounding better so i said put a wired bell on the wirefree panel.

soooo sad,you still cant read. if you would like me to highlight these points for you i will,i said changing not charging, Koolkid called ye EXPERTS, and i never said anything about a bell. soo sad

altor · 03-06-2009 12:21am

sorry, my mistake.. highlight the other ones for me.. getting dark here

oldhead · 03-06-2009 12:26am

why bother, im signing off now. this has gone on way to long. my original point was that wireless could be over come, that was it. i wish you well in your business in these trying times, hope all is going well. no hard feelings.
take care.

steifanc · 03-06-2009 9:28am

altor wrote: »

for alarms you have to be certified to standard en50131, its a requirment for certification not a recommendation, there are requirements for putting in cables for the alarm too so maybe the customer might perfer a wired system.. both systems are up to standard en50131 but running cables have to be as well. its not just a mater of walking into someones house and running cables on skerting boards like use to happen. can you show me how to manipulate the signal ? i have seen them being jammed before but not manipulated.. as i said the alarm will activate in this even of it being jammed..

OK this is the last time I'm going over this, please read the ISO model ,
this whole certification arose was someone posed the question how could a system that is certified by this standards fail ,
all a standard is , is that the company preforms to what there standard states,notice the word there in the sentence,so they set the standards,
if someone certifies a car window as safety glass, it doesn't mean it wont cut you.
as for signal manipulation, if you have a genuine question as do your own bit of research i will gladly help you, as for showing you, schools out for the summer, dit are enrolling for 2009/2010 try electrical/electronic or mechatronic engineering they all cover the topic.

KoolKid · 03-06-2009 9:35am

I think its time for a recap here .
Oldhead you first statement in this thread was that wireless is less secure.You have been asked numerous times for proof or facts to back up that statement . You still have not produced anything to back up that statement. Dispite at least 3 professional installers saying this has never happened you still rant on. Both wired & wireless systems can be the same grade so it is accepted by the Certification bodies, The Insurance industry & the Guards, yet you argue all these are wrong & you are right.
You then went on to compare wireless alarms to wireless speakers. totally off track
When people disagree with you or ask you to back up a statement you just become abusive insted of showing you know what you are talking about.
For some reason you state you cant discuss an alarm for a house without plans. When this was challanged you again become abusive.
You have been asked a couple of times do you install alarms or what qualifies you to make these clams. Again you refused to answer. Having an opinion is fine, no one has a problem with that. But your problem is you want to have your opinion but you get abusive if other peoples opinion disagrees with yours.

To Steifanc I would say you are clearly more qualified than me with regards to wirless networks & encryption etc. In theory yes anything is hackable but in reality it doesnt happen.It probobly has been done on a bench in certin conditions. If it was a security issue to be of concern we in the industry would be aware of it.
WRT certification the only option for an uncertified system now is a self install. Everything else must conform to EN50131.
Regarding your question with wired & wireless smoke alarms with children. I can honestly say 100% I would feel exactly as safe with both. Again if they are connected to an alarm both will conform to EN50131
Back to Oldhead who then goes on to to tell me I should trust new technology.
This is really amazing considering wireless is the latest technology availible.
Again when this was questioned it was answered with childish name calling.
When Ator asked you to read back on something your reply was "couldn't be arsed"
So all in all you have not sensibly put up one decent argument in this thread. And in typical behaviour when you realise you have lost the argument you run away.

paddy147 · 03-06-2009 7:43pm

How much roughly for a decent wireless alarm system for a 2 bed mid terrace house.

Dont want something mad just a decent and reasonably priced system that will do the job.

KoolKid · 03-06-2009 7:47pm

Could be anywhere from €1400 upwards.

paddy147 · 03-06-2009 7:52pm

koolkid wrote: »

Could be anywhere from €1400 upwards.

me arse it is.:rolleyes:

Eircom Phonewatch gave me a quote of 1000 all in for their wire free alarm system.

Looking around 1st before commiting to anything.

KoolKid · 03-06-2009 7:55pm

paddy147 wrote: »

me arse it is.:rolleyes:

Eircom Phonewatch gave me a quote of 1000 all in for their wire free alarm system.

Looking around 1st before commiting to anything.

Eircom will also quote you for the bare minimum & charge well for extras.
They will also tie you to a contract for monitoring & insist on a service & maintenance contract. Their cheap quotes do not even include an external bell. Shop around by all means but compare like with like before posting commentls like that.

altor · 03-06-2009 10:40pm

steifanc wrote: »

as for signal manipulation, if you have a genuine question as do your own bit of research i will gladly help you

This is covered in clause 8.4 of the EN50131 standard 2006..
all devices on a wirefree system must report back to the panel within 100 seconds.
as for manipulation,a signal transmitted by a transmitter is subjected to reshaping in such a manner that its reproducibility and/or transmissibility are/is exacerbated, but also in such a manner that the reshaping can be detected in a detector in the receiver. In this way, the signal transmission is protected against the possibility of a deliberately short range between the transmitter and receiver being enlarged by manipulation by an intermediate transmitter/receiver.

KoolKid · 03-06-2009 10:44pm

I think at the end of the day all they are arguing about here is in theory.
If you want to base your security system on the chances of James Bond or the Mission Impossible crew breaking into your house then wired or wireless really makes no difference now does it?

altor · 03-06-2009 10:52pm

I agree.. If someone wants to break in they will.. All we can do is advise people on what we know from experience installing alarms. Its up to them what they do after that

bushy... · 03-06-2009 10:54pm

altor wrote: »

This is covered in clause 8.4 of the EN50131 standard 2006..
all devices on a wirefree system must report back to the panel within 100 seconds.
as for manipulation,a signal transmitted by a transmitter is subjected to reshaping in such a manner that its reproducibility and/or transmissibility are/is exacerbated, but also in such a manner that the reshaping can be detected in a detector in the receiver. In this way, the signal transmission is protected against the possibility of a deliberately short range between the transmitter and receiver being enlarged by manipulation by an intermediate transmitter/receiver.

Basically if the signal suddenly increases , it will trigger. Just makes it a bit more secure.

Tbh , the worst thing that could be done is present it as "uncrackable" -

some people with serious skill and the time see stuff like that as "chewing gum for the brain"

They may not even "crack" it the easiest/most obvious way even though they could.

Chances are it was already defeated before it hit the market here

steifanc · 03-06-2009 11:48pm

altor wrote: »

This is covered in clause 8.4 of the EN50131 standard 2006..
all devices on a wirefree system must report back to the panel within 100 seconds.
as for manipulation,a signal transmitted by a transmitter is subjected to reshaping in such a manner that its reproducibility and/or transmissibility are/is exacerbated, but also in such a manner that the reshaping can be detected in a detector in the receiver. In this way, the signal transmission is protected against the possibility of a deliberately short range between the transmitter and receiver being enlarged by manipulation by an intermediate transmitter/receiver.

hi altor,
this en50131 clause 8.4 have you got a link for it ?
Ive looked but to no avail .
is that a direct quote ?
I'm not arguing about this any more , you will just have to take my word that systems like this with the right know how and equipment can be over come, i get paid for finding flaws in control systems amongts other things
unfortunately signal manipulation and signal reshaping are not the same thing.
if one was trying to counter a signal ,you wouldn't be trying to change the signal rather the logic within the carrier.
if you changed the signal shape or jammed it or interrupted the signal with in the 100MS scan cycle of course the panel would detect the change.

this of course isn't any thing for people to be worrying about, the systems are secure enough to maintain there function.

KoolKid · 04-06-2009 12:24pm

steifanc wrote: »

systems like this with the right know how and equipment can be over come, i get paid for finding flaws in control systems amongts other things

this of course isn't any thing for people to be worrying about, the systems are secure enough to maintain there function.

Agreed!!
But at this level both wired & wireless are both vunerable.
Oldheads original point was that wireless systems were less secure than wired.

steifanc · 04-06-2009 1:19pm

koolkid wrote: »

Agreed!!
But at this level both wired & wireless are both vulnerable.
Oldheads original point was that wireless systems were less secure than wired.

hi koolkid,
taking a abstract view on all this,
the likelihood of this being the case in a domestic/commercial installation are slim, if you were looking for flaws and venerability in systems taking a six sigma approach you talking a statistic of about .000030 per million. so i wouldn't be worrying about someone breaching a system, unless your the central bank.

as for wireless vs wired ,hypnotically !
a wireless system due to its nature of signal transmission the signal can be harnessed,from an external source.
where a wired system cant , wired has security with in its self,
but then you can pose the question of a wired system ,once you connect to a gsm or a dialer you putting the protocol at risk again.

what would i put in my house , if its pre wired , a wired alarm , if not a wireless , save on mess .
an alarm is only a deterrent .

.G. · 04-06-2009 6:59pm

Is there anywhere online that the EN50131 standards for alarms are available to read?

altor · 04-06-2009 9:05pm

steifanc wrote: »

hi altor,
this en50131 clause 8.4 have you got a link for it ?
Ive looked but to no avail .
is that a direct quote ?
I'm not arguing about this any more , you will just have to take my word that systems like this with the right know how and equipment can be over come, i get paid for finding flaws in control systems amongts other things
unfortunately signal manipulation and signal reshaping are not the same thing.
if one was trying to counter a signal ,you wouldn't be trying to change the signal rather the logic within the carrier.
if you changed the signal shape or jammed it or interrupted the signal with in the 100MS scan cycle of course the panel would detect the change.

this of course isn't any thing for people to be worrying about, the systems are secure enough to maintain there function.

Hi steifanc,
i dont think you can get a link for it, i have the EN50131-1-2006 standards, that covers this.
i am sure someone can get into the wirefree systems and mess around with the signals, in this event it comes up as a tamper or fault on the system and activates the alarm. by the sound of it you know more than me.

altor · 04-06-2009 9:07pm

superg wrote: »

Is there anywhere online that the EN50131 standards for alarms are available to read?

There is no link to download or read them, all certified alarm installers have them..

fred funk }{ · 04-06-2009 10:02pm

altor wrote: »

There is no link to download or read them, all certified alarm installers have them..

and had to pay handsomely for them too ye know......:)

altor · 04-06-2009 11:17pm

fred funk }{ wrote: »

and had to pay handsomely for them too ye know......:)

you bet

screwlox · 06-06-2009 1:14am

Guys,

Never a member here before, but watching this thread with extreme interest.
Some of the information being provided here is laughable, so I just HAD to subscribe, sorry!!

ALTOR;
I have a copy of the TWO standards here in front of me:
EN50131 1997, AND EN50131 2006.

Clause 8.4 in the 2006 standard relates to PROCESSING OF SIGNALS to an ARC (Alarm receiving Centre).
Clause 8.4 in the 1997 standard again relates to processing signals to an ARC.
There is no such quote, as you claim

.

I suggest wherever you bought those standards, you bring them back for a full refund immediately, because you've been HAD :eek:.
There is no standard in place yet for wireless Alarm systems. There is a European DRAFT standard, but it hasn't been passed yet.

Clause 8.9.2 in the 2006 standard relates to response processing times by the alarm panel - but this is for hardwired systems - NOT wired...

Now;
First of all, to fit an alarm, there are THREE main 'laws' (if you like);
1.) Compliance to Standard EN50131
2.) Compliance to SR40 (Standard recommendation SR40) - compulsory!
3.) PSA Licence.

You cannot get a PSA licence without 1 & 2, even though 2 is a 'Standard Recommendation', you still can't get a licence without compliance to it - therefore you cannot fit alarms.

Any of these standards can be purchased online from www.saiglobal.com - however they are copyrighted, therefore you will not find them on the Net.

Now with regard to the security of wireless/wired systems, they both provide exactly the same level, providing they are maintained properly...
As previously stated, any attempt to jam or block a signal will create an alarm condition back at the panel - therefore it is just as secure, albeit higher maintenance, as batteries will require replacing every 3 to 4 years.

As far as the integrity of the actual panel security goes, as an alarm installer for 25 years, in my opinion I would say wireless is MORE secure than wired - on a wired system, cables can be spliced open (by someone in the 'know') and the correct wires short-circuited. Such is not possible on a wirefree system.

STEIFANC:
You are correct that a 10-bit intelligent code can be cracked - however wireless devices use what is called a 'rolling code' - so the same 10-bit code is never ever repeated again. Therefore it is of no use to the person who decodes it.

With regard to the 'best make' of system, Aritech (G.E) sensors still work off 433mhz - along with every baby monitor, car alarm keyfob, garage remote etc. in the country.
868mhz will be the new European recognised frequency and it has already been allocated to the security sector by the European commission.
Any good manufacturer like Visonic or GSD (mentioned in a previous post) has had the cop-on to manufacture for 868mhz. Ok the G.E stuff is ok, but it also picks up a lot of other trash (Yes, I have actually measured the 'noise-floor' level on their equipment compared to 868mhz, so its fact, not fiction).

There is a new Wireless G.E Panel being launched into the domestic market this month however - the 'Advisor' (ATS1000) - which will take up to 64 zones. It can take wired OR wirefree sensors. It can also take 433mhz OR 868mhz radio equipment. USB flash programming, Access control capable, plus a new style 2-line LCD keypad.
About time, G.E!!!

dahamster · 06-06-2009 6:39am

868MHz is the ISM band controlled by Zigbee. That will fill up pretty quickly with the new typse of sensor networks that are being put in place. So in a couple of years the same issues will apply.

wired vs wireless alarm system

Comments