Alarm monitoring over UPC

KoolKid

I and others have tested it. It works. I have many alarms monitored over UPC.
A lot of these are SigNET which will flag alerts ,which need to be accepted,if the line is ever lost.
I have asked customers to notify me of any outages. Since the issues of the nightly resets have ceased I have seen or heard of no issues.
To clarify. An alarm dialler is basically a standard phone it simply communicates using tones. When UPC gives the phoneline out of the modem any phone will work on that line. Heres a simple experiment if you want to prove it yourself.
If you have switched from Eircom to UPC unplug your UPC phone from the modem and plug in your old Eircom phone. It will work. There is no difference.
Anyway as we're on a new page I'' ask my questions again.
(As Eircom are ignoring these I doubt they will bother reading back a page:rolleyes:)
1) Why are Eircom lying to customers, and users here,saying alarms can't be monitored over UPC lines?
2) Why are Eircom offering GSM as an alternative when is it widely accepted in the industry that they are unreliable due to GSM jammers being easily accessible.
3) Do Eircom inform customers of these vulnerabilities when selling GSM monitoring to customers?

BostonB

My point was UPC isn't any more secure than anything else.

Unless proven otherwise I assume Eircom, promote what ever makes them more money. Which isn't UPC.

KoolKid

Promotion is one thing. But telling blatant lies and saying it doesn't work is another. Furthermore if they are telling those lies to ,either force people to keep their Eircom line, or to sell them an even less secure product is worse.
They won't even answer if they are informing the customer of the risks related to GSM monitoring. You have to wonder why that is??

BostonB

It wouldn't be without precedent.

eircom: Tony

KoolKid wrote: »

I have not had the issues with the resets in a long time.
I have had issues with line dropping on regular land lines also.
That is not at issue here. As I said in a post above no matter what security you put in place there will be a what if scenario of events where that will fail.
Yes a UPC line can be cut, yes a phone line can be cut. These points can be alarmed, its not 100% secure but it is making life more difficult for an intruder.
I ,for one, would prefer for a potential intruder to have to physically cut a cable rather than walk up with a jammer in their pocket. Also, given the choice, I would prefer an intruder to have to lift a manhole than just snip a phone line.Its a little more difficult & a little more awkward.
However the issues here are that Eircom lie to customers & to users here & say an alarm can not be monitored over a UPC line. When caught out in that lie they choose to ignore the questions . It is no obvious that Eircom, while using this forum, are selective in what they want to answer & discuss.
They have never answered why they lie about the ability to monitor alarms over UPC.
They have never answered why they offer a GSM solution when there are serious issues with jamming.
They have never answered whether they make customers aware of the issues when selling them this unreliable GSM solution.

Hi again Koolkid

There has been no attempt on our part to lie or mislead and I have made several attempts to answer your questions. As I have posted in my previous post, ‘ I have already provided my answer based on the information made available to us here and would only be repeating the same’, this is quite different to ‘not answering’.

I have spoke with Phonewatch in regards to your three specific questions and have received the following answers.


.1) Why are Eircom saying monitoring will not work over UPC when clearly it does?

Issue number one is that if power is lost in the house the digital unit does not work, GSM diallers have their own battery back-up. We have done some testing on digital lines (i.e. Magnet ). Often when the alarm is tested we may receive signals without issue, however if tested again (days weeks or months later) you may get through 9 out of 10 times 7 out of 10 or 5 out of 10 i.e. it is not reliable enough, this could be linked to the codec used in the VoIP network or even DTMF regeneration methods, we have no control over these settings in a VoIP network. So technically monitoring can work but reliability on a day to day basis is a concern.

2) Why are Eircom offing GSM as a solution when clearly there are serious issues with reliability

As previously outlined we have over 12k GSM units in operation and to date have no evidence that there are reliability issues.

3) Do Eircom inform the customer of these issues when selling them the GSM option??

At the point of sale we inform customers of all options available to them, including the deployment of a GSM unit as the primary means of network connection or as a back up facility.

I hope this is closer to the answers you needed and I hope you continue to use our forum. Though the findings may not agree with your own I have nothing further to add on this subject and as mentioned in previous posts any further queries should be direct to the technical staff within Phonewatch.
Regards
Tony
eircom moderator

KoolKid

Thank you Tony,
1> No level of monitoring is 100% secure and under various instances all will fail given the right scenario. The UPC modems can be backed up the same as GSM dialler or radio. I agree external forces may cause the line to fail but this is also true with Eircom or Vodafone land lines. Also if I make enough test calls on a land line a percentage of them will fail. We use a lot of SigNET systems where a line fault stays on the screen to be acknowledged and where these events are logged. My own system is UPC monitored. I have not had a single line fault in the past couple of months. We also check logs during services and have not noticed any increase in line faults or FTC faults compared to land lines.
I think, in all fairness, you should admit that telling customers the service does not work is wrong.
2> Im presuming Eircom, like every other installer in the country, are aware of the limitations & the vunerabilities regarding GSM monitoring . Are you saying because none of Eircoms connections have been targeted that there is no risk?? None of our installations have been subject to it either, but I have seen the evedince & it is compelling. It sounds like here you are saying when it happens then we will address it ..
3> Obviousally you inform the customer of whats available. The question was Do Eircom inform the customer of the risks of GSM monitoring when selling them the GSM solution. All Im asking for here is a yes or no.
I myself will not monitor an alarm over GSM unless the customer puts in writing they have been informed of the risks and how easily they can be jammed.

From my own point of view I am not looking for answers to agree with my own I was simply looking for answers , full stop.
To sum up ::
I accept Eircoms explanations for not wanting to monitor over UPC but likewise I would ask you to accept that
1> The risk of failure applys to any line
and
2> It is wrong to mislead customers and users here by stating it does not work.
I accept it is Eircoms right to continue to use GSM monitoring ,but I don't understand the logic of saying it hasn't happened us. If customers were to use that logic they would never buy an alarm untill after they were robbed. ( I know some people think like that;))
3> I would still like a simple yes or no answer here. Either the risks of jamming are explained to them or not.

I would like to thank and commend you on your time & effort in this matter. I'm sure it has been as frustrating for you try to get straight answers. I have ,rang technical previousally re question 1,the answer was always the same . It doesn't work. Might I suggest updating Technical & customer service staff..Thanks again

lucernarian

Just two quick points I will mention. Until there are certified and safe power backups for UPC modems, they really shouldn't be used instead of a phone line as they are less likely to work assuming all other things are equal. While it can be done, I doubt eircom phonewatch will change their policy until it acutally happens.

Second point is that this thread is going nowhere. You should be directing your corrospondence at eircom phonewatch or else insurance companies and persuade them to bring pressure to bear on eircom etc.

KoolKid

I have said numerous times I have contacted Eircom directly.
Their answers were always the same. It won't work..
The insurance issue is in hand already. IMO its only a matter of time before GSMs are removed from the standards and certinly from grade 3.
As regards a safe power supply. Why would a 12 volt power supply be safe on alarm ,but not on a modem ,once the rating is correct?

IP monitoring is coming, the stations are geared up for it.The hardware & software is there. I am sure they have done much more research with the insurance companies and the certification bodies than you or I ever will.

lucernarian

KoolKid wrote: »

I have said numerous times I have contacted Eircom directly.
Their answers were always the same. It won't work..
The insurance issue is in hand already. IMO its only a matter of time before GSMs are removed from the standards and certinly from grade 3.
As regards a safe power supply. Why would a 12 volt power supply be safe on alarm ,but not on a modem ,once the rating is correct?

IP monitoring is coming, the stations are geared up for it.The hardware & software is there. I am sure they have done much more research with the insurance companies and the certification bodies than you or I ever will.

I'm sure it's safe to use a 12V backup but you keep missing the point. Such a power supply will need to be certified for use as the current demands are different and the battery will need to be larger and housed in an appropriate unit etc. I don't think it will be enough to simply wire up a car battery to the UPC modem:) What do the NSAI have to say about this matter I wonder...

IP monitoring is coming, but it's not here. All that matters is that it's introduced between the insurance companies and an alarm monitoring provider. I don't think that's happened yet in the Irish market but I stand to be corrected on this.

KoolKid

The same power supplies as are used in alarms will be used. These will have the same protection & back up as are used in a large range of alarm & monitoring equipment already. Whether a power supply is safe depends on whether it is used correctly.
The only issue using it for a modem etc. is whether it is the correct voltage ,rating and back up battery is used to meet the requirements.
As existing regulated power supplies are acceptable on existing security equipment (including warning and signaling devices) they must be acceptable for any additional equipment. I can't think why or how they could say a power supply is ok for GSM & Radio but not ok for a modem? (again providing the correct voltage & rating is met).
I never mentioned or suggested using a car battery so I fail to understand your reference to such
The only reason I have ever seen the NSAI look at a power supply was to check it was tampered and the battery was correct .
I would also be looking for clarification from EQA and SSAIB. I wouldn't be the first to experience the NSAI getting it wrong.:rolleyes:
As I already said re IP monitoring, I doubt the stations are implementing this without having consulted with the relevant authorities.

lucernarian

KoolKid wrote: »

The same power supplies as are used in alarms will be used. These will have the same protection & back up as are used in a large range of alarm & monitoring equipment already. Whether a power supply is safe depends on whether it is used correctly.
The only issue using it for a modem etc. is whether it is the correct voltage ,rating and back up battery is used to meet the requirements.
As existing regulated power supplies are acceptable on existing security equipment (including warning and signaling devices) they must be acceptable for any additional equipment. I can't think why or how they could say a power supply is ok for GSM & Radio but not ok for a modem? (again providing the correct voltage & rating is met).
I never mentioned or suggested using a car battery so I fail to understand your reference to such
The only reason I have ever seen the NSAI look at a power supply was to check it was tampered and the battery was correct .
I would also be looking for clarification from EQA and SSAIB. I wouldn't be the first to experience the NSAI getting it wrong.:rolleyes:
As I already said re IP monitoring, I doubt the stations are implementing this without having consulted with the relevant authorities.

I'm sure it's quite okay for me to give an example of something that wouldn't be acceptable for use even if no one had proposed it? My car battery point was just an example of how a solution for those modems would have to be more detailed and complicated than a simple battery being used.

From what I've seen of power alarm supplies, they are located within the vicinity of a fuse box or the likes. I've rarely seen internal TV cabling near a fuse box so the UPC cable would have to be brought over to where the alarm power supply is located or else a cable would have to be brought from the power supply to wherever the UPC modem is located. A UPC modem will by necessity will need power continuously and a fair bit of it too for 24 hour backup. That means an extra expense for providing such a setup.

I'm sure there's plenty of consultation going on with the relevant authorities etc. etc. but as it stands today, I don't think monitoring via IP is happening in Ireland. I think the market will have to wait the approvals etc before using direct IP monitoring or ordinary monitoring via VoIP for that matter. They both are dependent on internet access either way.

KoolKid

To be honest you seem to be trying to over complicate this.
A power supply can be located anywhere close to a permanant mains supply, providing it conforms to the national safety standards.
Why would need TV cables close to the power supply?
It is a lot simplier than you are trying to make this. 12vdc alarm devices can be all over a building , they don't have to be beside the power supply.
A UPC mobem is rated at 1amp, it uses less than this. A decent size alarm system with radio or GSM could come to well over 1amp & can be backed up to sadisfy EN50131 requirements, why couldn't a modem/router.?
I agree ,I don't think IP monitoring is in use yet, but , as I said, the hardware & software is there. Anyway using UPC is still using an analouge phone line .What its dependent on is not relevant. Landline monitoring is also dependent on external services. My original question to Eircom was why they lie to customers saying it doesn't work. I think Tony's last post clarifys it does work but Eircom don't want to use it. Eircom are slow to change, we know that.
Maybe shortly when we are all monitoring over IP & installing HKC Quantum,s or equivalant , they may finally get rid of that out of date Simon panel & the out of date GSM digis.

lucernarian

The only thing Tony clarified was that eircom don't want to use it currently and that he doesn't know the exact reason and that he no longer wants to discuss it.

UPC are providing an analogue phone interface as part of a digital EuroDOCSIS modem. That is utterly different to the structure of the PSTN network. What it runs on is very important, I suggest you look into how VoIP works versus the PSTN. However, I must point out that UPC's phone service may well work on ringfenced capacity which stays on UPC's own networks and doesn't travel over the public internet at all. But that's up to UPC to answer. The point is that IP congestion and routing problems may or may not affect UPC's phone service but it certainly would affect ordinary VoIP like Blueface etc. At least proper IP signalling will overcome this and I hope it's introduced soon. VoIP is just not as reliable as PSTN without the sort of internet connection service level agreements that ordinary customers just wouldn't get.

As far as the UPC modem itself is concerned, I was trying to explain how the UPC modem will need to be nearby the alarm panel/device regardless of where the alarm device is located. And anywhere I've ever seen an alarm panel, I haven't seen a UPC cable nearby. I'm also merely suggesting that the power backup for a UPC connection will add extra expense while the eircom line won't need it.

KoolKid

At the end of the day no service provider will guarantee their service to be up all the time or at any given time. As I have said time & time again someone will always think up a scenario of events where communication will fail.
You are really rushing to condemn this (not sure of your agenda here)even though there seems to be some areas you don't understand.
For example : Why does the UPC modem have to be near the alarm panel??

Again to compare this to Eircoms GSM solution which they offer in preference to UPC.
For Eircoms GSM to fail it just takes a guy with a $20 jammer in his pocket.
For UPC to Fail either UPCs service has to be down. (Fairly rare in my time with them), The intruder has to know you have a UPC line and has to physically disconnect that line either in a service box (Which we would alarm), or harder still in a manhole, and then hope you don't have a radio back up.
In all honesty which scenario do you think is more secure?

Irish Fire

KoolKid wrote: »

At the end of the day no service provider will guarantee their service to be up all the time or at any given time. As I have said time & time again someone will always think up a scenario of events where communication will fail.
You are really rushing to condemn this (not sure of your agenda here)even though there seems to be some areas you don't understand.
For example : Why does the UPC modem have to be near the alarm panel??

Again to compare this to Eircoms GSM solution which they offer in preference to UPC.
For Eircoms GSM to fail it just takes a guy with a $20 jammer in his pocket.
For UPC to Fail either UPCs service has to be down. (Fairly rare in my time with them), The intruder has to know you have a UPC line and has to physically disconnect that line either in a service box (Which we would alarm), or harder still in a manhole, and then hope you don't have a radio back up.
In all honesty which scenario do you think is more secure?

I think there are different agendas at play......

I've come across this several times also I've had a couple of commercial customers where I need a fire alarm monitored and they won't do it one guy there told me that it was a union issue (i kid you not)

BostonB

KoolKid wrote: »

...For UPC to Fail either UPCs service has to be down. (Fairly rare in my time with them), The intruder has to know you have a UPC line and has to physically disconnect that line either in a service box (Which we would alarm), or harder still in a manhole, and then hope you don't have a radio back up.In all honesty which scenario do you think is more secure?

Not that I think a phone line or mobile are better. but thats little glib.

You can see UPC from the street, it usually joins houses by running in the gutter or on the facia, with regular junction boxes. Often with an external cable running down and into the living room. Not to mention any transformers for the street I've seen are usually mounted low at ground level and unprotected by anything, and in plain sight.

lucernarian

What?! I don't have any agenda, though I can't change anyone's mind if they think it. All I can say is to look at my other posts in related fields, I most certainly do not appreciate defending eircom or any other commercial interests. Besides, I'm not the one who wants to install alarms using UPC OR the one who wants to keep it on eircom's network. The sooner IP monitoring is standardised and accepted, the better.

I have tried my best to explain something to you and I have answered all your questions and points so far, in fairness. I can't do much more if anyone still disagrees with me. This is my point about the modem and alarm panel: if the UPC modem is to enjoy the same power backup facilities as the alarm panel, it will need a cable to go from there to wherever the UPC modem is, or else the UPC modem will HAVE to be located beside the alarm panel (which will need a UPC cable brought to it). Also, the UPC modem only has an RJ11 socket I believe, so there's no way to leave the alarm hardwired to the modem. That aspect would exist too with IP monitoring so I guess that's not so important. I'm not saying any issues can't be surmounted, I'm saying there are disadvantages associated with using the UPC voice service.

You are ignoring the parts where I mentioned that it would be very easy to disconnect UPC service (considering a large proportion of houses have the UPC cable literally tacked down a wall to the living room window). There's also the bit where I said that all you'd need to open a manhole cover is a feckin' clawhammer/crowbar sure:pac:

KoolKid

I do accept its easy to disconnect UPC. Also accept its easier to disconnect a phone line & easier still to jam a GSM. I have accepted there are faults an vulnerabilities with all signaling . But applying the same judgement you must concede that UPC would be more secure than GSM.
A modem could use the same Power supply as the alarm ( assuming ratings & battery are per standards) or it could use a dedicated PSU . Either way the easier option is to get a cable from the panel to the modem. In most cases there is nedundent phone line that can be used. Line seizure can still be achieved using one RJ11 patch lead & 1 double RJ11 socket. Hard wiring into the modem shouldn't be an issue as its within the protected area. As good practice I would ensure it takes more than 30 seconds to access the modem. On that note ,I seen a nice idea at ISEC last week with everything contained it what looks like a rad cover.
I do take all the point you are makings ,but please take my main point which is it is more secure than GSM . Therefore why would Eircom refuse to use this service (UPC) because of vulnerabilities, while at the same time offer GSM as an alternative.?

lucernarian

I don't accept that UPC is more secure than an eircom phoneline but I do accept that GSM is less secure in many circumstances (e.g. so long as the power to a neighbourhood is not cut off, and that the UPC cable isn't freely accessible on the front of the house). In my view, eircom shouldn't be offering GSM-only units.

KoolKid

To_be_confirmed wrote: »

I do accept that GSM is less secure in many circumstances (e.g. so long as the power to a neighbourhood is not cut off, and that the UPC cable isn't freely accessible on the front of the house). In my view, eircom shouldn't be offering GSM-only units.

2 Things we agree on.;)

towger

Hope you don't mind me reopening this thread, but I think my question will add to the overall discussion.
Despite the valid concerns above, I do wish to switch over to UPC for phone, and therefore have to go with a GSM dialler in my Phonewatch alarm. Does anybody know which of the Mobile networks is used. We live in a bit of a black spot, with Meteor and Voda reasonably ok, but O2 terrible.
Any thoughts on how good the signal needs to be and who the carrier is ? Thanks!

KoolKid

I do not know what provider Eircom use for GSM .
Given the choice I would use UPC rather than GSM for monitoring.
Don't let Eircom tell you it doesn't work. It does.

cracker

I am interested in switching to UPC also. I don't have PW but my alarm dials my mobile when it goes off. I would like to keep this. From reading this post it appears that I could get my UPC VOIP line to do this (without using a GSM dialler). Am I correct and what is required to switch an alarm from using the land line to the UPC line?

eircom: Mark

towger wrote: »

Hope you don't mind me reopening this thread, but I think my question will add to the overall discussion.
Despite the valid concerns above, I do wish to switch over to UPC for phone, and therefore have to go with a GSM dialler in my Phonewatch alarm. Does anybody know which of the Mobile networks is used. We live in a bit of a black spot, with Meteor and Voda reasonably ok, but O2 terrible.
Any thoughts on how good the signal needs to be and who the carrier is ? Thanks!

Hi towger,

I would suggest you call eircom phone watch on 1850 500 900, they may be able to answer your query.

Thanks, Mark

KoolKid

cracker wrote: »

I am interested in switching to UPC also. I don't have PW but my alarm dials my mobile when it goes off. I would like to keep this. From reading this post it appears that I could get my UPC VOIP line to do this (without using a GSM dialler). Am I correct and what is required to switch an alarm from using the land line to the UPC line?

Its simply a matter of connecting your new UPC line into your alarm dialler.
It works. We are switching alarms to UPC every week.

Thunderbird2

eircom: Tony wrote: »

Hi Koolkid
have confirmed this with the PhoneWatch team, If a customer wished to change over to UPC and wished to keep PhoneWatch service;
1. customer can keep the eircom line ( along with other provider) and continue with PhoneWatch. Moving to UPC does not exclude the customer.
2. Customer can drop eircom phoneline and go with the GSM option, which connects to the digital service of other provider.

If customer disconnects the eircom line and therefore from eircom network, we can no longer deliver our security service on that cancelled line, (even though 'perfectly good'). We cannot offer the package accross the other providers (digital) service.

To get any more specific info on a particular case or if you wish to discuss this with a member of there technical team you would have to call 1850500900 and take option 1. They would be happy to have someone within their technical team to explain more.
Tony

Does this mean the customer has to pay for 2 phone lines or is it covered in the €250 monitoring fee????? Only reason were not with EP is because they cancelled the install and never told us. Guess business must be great! We were also told that it wasn't possible to connect our existing hkc 8/12 alarm to monitoring :rolleyes:

KoolKid

There is no reason why you need to keep your eircom line to monitor an alarm. UPC and other providers work fine.
There is also no reason why a Securewatch can't be monitored. Other than them trying to sell you a new alarm. This is typical of Eircom, I had a rep try to tell me to rip out a Signet system from my prewired house and install their wireless. For some strange reason Eircom couldn't use this even though its monitored already.. ???

Thunderbird2

no I know that I just wanted to see eircoms reply. I've a hkc 10/70 that blows the old simon xt and Simon 3 away.just wanted to see if they charge their customers for a phone line that is used for there alarm only

KoolKid

Either that or they will offer you a GSM without telling you of the issues with jamming.