Re: Ademco wireless system

[tourman <robercampbell@xxxxxxxxx>]

On Sep 15, 10:25 am, Frank Olson <Use-the-email-
li...@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
> tourman wrote:
> > To be clear on your definition of "lock down", changing the installer
> > code to their own is more than sufficient to protect the integrity of
> > the panel and it's communication  data. This is always done by every
> > company and any company that doesn't would be very foolish. Nothing
> > more should ever be acceptable to you as a consumer. This allows only
> > them in to make low level changes which affect the panel's ability to
> > call the station.
>
> Careful there, Bob.  Your bud Bass has very strong views on this
> abhorrent practice.  For shame!!  :-)

RHC: I sometimes wonder when we are discussing locking a panel,
whether some are mixing up simply changing the installer code rather
than enabling the hardware lock. In effect, changing the installer
code IS locking someone out of installer level programming mode, but
this is only as long as that company is monitoring it. If the actual
hardware lockout is not enabled, the next company simply defaults the
panel, which is probably the best idea anyway, since it's often easy
to overlook that the previous company had enabled other features you
may not want (such as callback for example, in which case you wouldn't
be able to dial in to the panel). To my knowledge, every company
changes the installer code, and with good reason.

There are a few companies up here that install the wiring and the
alarm for builders. They change the installer code too, although it's
probably not necessary since the unit is being sold to a private buyer
of the home who will then decide what he wants to do ie: put it on
line, or leave it local. It's just normal practice in this industry to
protect against tampering of the information in the panel. Actual
hardware lockout is something QUITE different....