Re: Brinks & Broadview Takeovers

[tourman <robercampbell@xxxxxxxxx>]

On Oct 7, 1:41=A0pm, Jim <alarmi...@xxxxxxx> wrote:
> On Oct 3, 10:54 am, tourman <robercampb...@xxxxxxxxx> wrote:
>
>
>
>
>
> > RHC: One point of clarification Bob. I don't thing it is correct for
> > any company to give out their installer code (which I think is what
> > you mean...) upon cessation of the contract, or service, or whatever.
> > I doubt there is anyone who would ever do that. But as long as the
> > board is not actually locked, as you know, anyone or any other company
> > can default and start fresh. Defaulting also gets rid of any
> > "proprietary" information (such as dialer information) which some
> > companies seem to hold as having some real value, and also ensures the
> > panel is fresh upon reuse, with some previous things (like callback)
> > disabled. An unlocked board is totally reusable by anyone who knows
> > what he is doing, but a locked board is useless property......that's
> > my point !
>
> > On long term contracts, we totally agree....(sshh.....let's not get
> > Jim riled up again.....:))-
>
> On the same subject, here's another post from Ken Kirshenbaums blog.
> Kinda says it all =A0..... about the value of installer codes and
> lockouts.
>
> Mr. Kirschenbaum,
>
> =A0 =A0 Thank you for providing this easy to read question and answer
> forum. =A0I have really enjoyed reading it and this is the 1st time I've
> had the urge to comment on one of the subjects:
>
> =A0 =A0 =A0After reading the inquiry (from Doug O. Padgett) =A0I have a
> comment in addition to your answer "it would be prudent to obtain a
> release for exchange of codes". =A0 That is so true and I couldn't agree
> with you more... However, since each installing company protects their
> unique 'installer codes' (also known as programming codes) ESPECIALLY
> from their competitors, the outgoing company would be very wise =A0to
> also change their programming/installer code to anything else once
> they know they are going to have to give it up to a competitor. =A0That
> way, they are still protecting their proprietary information to the
> fullest extent they can.
>
> =A0 =A0 =A0You see, I used to work at a national alarm company for 7 year=
s
> and every time a technician or salesperson (including me) came in with
> a competitors programming code, we wrote it on a big chalk board for
> everyone to see. =A0(It made life so much easier when taking over a
> competitors system.) =A0I found that some companies shared it freely,
> while others protected it vigorously.
>
> =A0 =A0 =A0Just a thought.
> Cynthia Hart
> Hart Universal Security
> Springfield, Oregon

RHC: How does this really say anything about the value of the lockout
feature. If another company was to discover your installer code, it
doesn't matter a damn whether it's locked or not, since they simply go
in with that code and unlock the board, then default to factory.

In my experience, installer codes are usually "discovered" by another
company because the previous company installer foolishly wrote it in
the programming sheets and left the paperwork inside the can. Or an
installer got fired and hired on with the new company giving up this
information to his new bosses. Normally, the new company simply
defaults and goes from there, with or without knowing the previous
installer code. If the board is locked, it's little more than a minor
irritant to the incoming company since they go to the truck and get a
replacement one, but it certainly is a major issue for a homeowner
buying a house who wishes to assume responsibility for his own locked
system. In a lot of cases, locked boards find themselves left locked,
even after they should have been unlocked, and innocent parties are
denied access to their private property.

If I lose an account to an incoming company when a new client buys the
house, there is no way for them to find out my installer code. They
can't dial in since they don't know the panel ID. All they can do is
default and start fresh. So how does locking it solve anything other
than to cost the incoming company a $50 board....no big deal
really !!

I probably see more locked boards than anyone else other than Jim
Rojas as a part of my unlocking activities.  So granted, it likely
makes me far more sensitive to this sort of accidental or deliberate
abuse of the feature. And as Jim rightly says, it's the abuse of the
feature that is the major problem......

All I can say is, if the alarm business is so cutthroat in certain
parts of the world, and there are actually companies going around
raiding other's accounts, I can certainly understand the tendency to
want to lock all the boards. Any defence against that kind of storm,
must appear useful !!  We simply don't have that sort of thing
happening on a regular basis in our town.

I do see a lot of locked boards coming my way from the Toronto area
though. I suspect it's because of the effect of the "super
discounters" (monitoring from $6 to $9 monthly) who have a big station
in that city. So regular companies are saying..."if you're going to
steal my accounts because of a customer of mine wishing to go with
your cheap price, you're going to have to pay at least $50 to do
so" ........

C'est la vie I guess....it's not going away for sure, although it
should. Given the real risk of harm (accidental or deliberate),
companies that use the feature should be a lot more diligent in
ensuring the boards are unlocked at the point when they should be.