Re: Next Alarm

["Crash Gordon" <webmaster@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>]

oh yah...that's that redirector device I was asking about several months
ago...

I lost a client to them a few weeks ago..no wonder they didn't even have to
send someone to this guys house. I wonder what they will do if they ever
need to get into the panel? I guess that's not important.


"Jackcsg" <nospam@xxxxxxxxxx> wrote in message
news:A4SdnY-DxdoPMJTeRVn-3g@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
> "Robert L Bass" <sales@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote in message
> news:pdeig1t4ocl4vco412fhf6er0j40f1aqjr@xxxxxxxxxx
>> > That's not true. Their methods were in question...particularly the non
> UL
>> > compliant ones...
>>
>> Which non-UL compliant methods?  I'm not doubting you.  I don't
>> recall a discussion about that.
>>
>>
> They use a device that intercepts the dial attempt, and re-routes it over
> the internet. They don't need to get into programming, nor even care about
> a
> lock code. They take advantage of the poor security you have with
> practically every panel on the market. No message authentication. I'd give
> you some ideas why this is bad, and not a listed UL method of monitoring
> LSD's, but I don't think this is the place to discuss a major, existing
> security issue.
>
> Jack
>
>