Re: avoiding being "locked out"

["Crash Gordon" <webmaster@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>]

Precisely what Mark said...I had an employee who worked for me for a long
time, that I had to let go...he took it personally and was sending rogue
signals on alarm panels creating false alarm dispatches. Took me a while to
figure out what was  happening and I ended up having to change hundreds of
account numbers and making the old accts dead accounts (so I can't even
reuse them now).

Even just having the phone number of recievers can be a problem...even if
you don't know the account numbers. All my reciever numbers are invisible
via the phone co...but if an installer had them and wanted to create havoc
he/she could.

Now, none of my guys know anything as I change access after system is tested
into cs. - including the cs phone number gets switched.

Trust no one.


"R.H.Campbell" <rh.campbell@xxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote in message
news:6JydnSlT2OlfaYXeRVn-uQ@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
> Sorry, yes you're right, Ademco is quite different that way. I am not
> familiar with Ademco panels so assumed (always dangerous to do) that all
> panels reacted pretty much the same way. Perhaps there are other panels
> where this applies as well. I am only very familiar with DSC and Paradox
> and of course there are a great many panels on the market, some of which
> could be just like Ademco. So what I posted is quite incorrect for Ademco
> and other panels that react the same way (assuming there are others).
>
> One thing I have wondered is why everyone makes such a fuss about keeping
> the receiver number, account number, and other information so secret. I
> ask this question quite honestly, since to my knowledge, my CS doesn't
> make an issue about such things. Perhaps you could tell me why knowing the
> receiver number that someone uses is so dangerous. I do service for other
> alarmco's who are friends, when they are on vacation, and they always
> leave me with the relevant calling information, plus receiver numbers for
> the blocks of panels, in case I have to replace one of their panels in
> their absence. And they know all my information in return.
>
> Thanks
>
> RHC
>
> "Crash Gordon" <webmaster@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote in message
> news:mX5Se.406$1u4.9178@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
>> How does changing only the installer code protect proprietary
>> information?
>>
>> It certainly doesnt on Ademco products...anyone that knows how,  can get
>> by the installer code unless the panel is locked, leaving your cs dialer
>> number, and other info exposed.
>>
>>
>>
>>
>> "R.H.Campbell" <rh.campbell@xxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote in message
>> news:_LqdnedbqPQ0L4reRVn-oQ@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
>>> Point of clarification ! There are two different issues that I have
>>> found can sometimes get confused as one and the same. We have to be
>>> careful which one we are taling about.
>>>
>>> Changing the installer code is one issue, and is something every
>>> installing company can and should do. This is totally sufficient to
>>> protect all the proprietary information in the alarm panel. Once the
>>> panel is defaulted to factory by the next company, any and all
>>> proprietary information is lost. In these threads, this seems to be
>>> incorrectly taken as "locking out a panel" which is a totally different
>>> thing.
>>>
>>> "Locking out " a panel really means utilizing the true hardware lockout
>>> feature which in turn means that NO ONE else can EVER get in to the
>>> panel and it won't default to factory (and in so doing destroys all that
>>> information that everyone seems so intent on keeping secret). It's only
>>> purposes that I can see are to 1- legitimately protect a leased or not
>>> yet paid for system from outright theft in one form or another...and 2-
>>> to maintain control of "who comes next" in regards to resetting the
>>> panel to be monitored elsewhere by some other company.
>>>
>>> Number 2 is where the abuse can happen, NOT the first situation
>>>
>>> R.H.Campbell
>>> Home Security Metal Products
>>> Ottawa, Ontario, Canada
>>> www.homemetal.com
>>>
>>>
>>> "Stanley Barthfarkle" <sbarth@xxxxxxxxx> wrote in message
>>> news:MBMRe.2733$la.939@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
>>>> There are several reasons why it's in a monitoring company's best
>>>> interest
>>>> to "lock out" a panel- mostly having to do with keeping installer codes
>>>> secret, (which might be used in more than one customer's panel) and
>>>> keeping
>>>> account numbers and central station phone line numbers private. With
>>>> this
>>>> info, someone could disrupt monitoring for one or even many accounts,
>>>> or
>>>> create a "runaway" phantom alarm panel to keep the police from
>>>> responding
>>>> after several false alarms.
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> <thesatguy1@xxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote in message
>>>> news:p9LQe.1026$oJ2.392@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
>>>>> At several points I have contacted all the buyers of alarm system
>>>>> contracts and they all want to lockout the panels of the accounts they
>>>>> buy mainly because they think you won't change companies at some point
>>>>> if you're panel has to be replaced.
>>>>>
>>>>> Clearly if the customer owns their panel (any many do not ever own
>>>>> their panel) they should be able to do whatever they darn well please
>>>>> with it. However, a lot of companies simply go along with the programs
>>>>> they have hooked themselves up with and violate the law.  I remember
>>>>> Counterforce in Houston telling me I would have to replace every panel
>>>>> that they could not download and lockout or they wouldn't buy the
>>>>> contracts.  It boggles the mind.
>>>>>
>>>>> All you can do is ask.  You should also verify they didn't lie to you.
>>>>>
>>>>> <powercat@xxxxxxxxxxx> wrote in message
>>>>> news:1124629286.071477.270930@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
>>>>>> Greetings I know a commercial alarm system installer who moonlights
>>>>>> on
>>>>>> residential set-ups.  Basically I do the unpleasant part (running the
>>>>>> wiring) and he does the programming and is paid appropriately for
>>>>>> that
>>>>>> task.  What he does not do is sell alarm monitoring to avoid a
>>>>>> conflict
>>>>>> with his "real" employer.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> This all sounds very fair to me.  He does say "pick an alarm
>>>>>> monitoring
>>>>>> company that won't "lock out" your panel and prevent you from
>>>>>> switching
>>>>>> later".
>>>>>>
>>>>>> In short how do you know if a company is engaged in that practice
>>>>>> (obviously I can ask).  This sounds very shady to me especially if I
>>>>>> own the equipment.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Thanks for any comments.
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>
>>>
>>
>>
>
>