[Message Prev][Message Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Message Index][Thread Index]

Re: NX unlocker



On Monday, February 29, 2016 at 12:46:26 PM UTC-5, E DAWSON wrote:
> "Jim" <alarminex> wrote in message=20
>=20
>=20
>=20
> I am not naive at all. The point of logic is that the average guy, such a=
s=20
> the boiler man, contractor, or the repair man, has absolutely no clue as =
to=20
> how to even operate the software, nor the experience to know how to=20
> reprogram the system. The point is that the little software add-on is=20
> predicated upon the fact that the operator has to know how to use the=20
> download software first. And, it does not give you the installer code=20
> presently in the system, it only defaults it. So, he cannot change the=20
> programming to try to bring suit against the present monitoring company,=
=20
> because their installer code would have been changed.
>=20
> Now I could see the boiler man who wants to get in for any nefarious reas=
on,=20
> would most probably first try to bypass the system through any points of=
=20
> access, such as doors, motions, etc. This could be done at the source or =
at=20
> the panel. It is a great stretch of the imagination, that the boiler man=
=20
> would take the extremely hard route of download software and system=20
> programming.
>=20
> Also, are you not forgetting that whoever accesses the panel is leaving a=
n=20
> electronic signature in the buffer of date and time? No, the average thie=
f=20
> or perpetrator is not going to go this route when he can easily affect th=
e=20
> integrity of a zone or zones as well as the communication route with ease=
=20
> and absolute anonymity.
>=20
> This ready made product is only for the ready made alarm installer to onl=
y=20
> reset the installer code ( it will not give you the previous code).
>=20
> The supposed villain could just as easily bring an already programmed boa=
rd=20
> to the premises and just swich it out. It will take a lot less time to sw=
ap=20
> out a board on an NX panel and just move the wiring over...less than 2=20
> minutes and a lot less conspicuous.
>=20
> This is not a question of ethics, it is a question of logic. This certain=
ly=20
> is not a ready made product for stealing.
>=20
> By the way, do you use the download software with the direct connect, and=
=20
> are you familiar on how to use it to read the prior installer code, witho=
ut=20
> the NXunlocker?


Ok, let's play.=20

I'll use your scenario and let's say you live where I do.=20

Have you ever heard of Slomin's Oil company? They have well over a million =
alarm accounts in the New York Tri state area. In my area there are more oi=
l companies in the alarm installation business than not, with hundreds if n=
ot thousands of (quasi) alarm installers, former alarm installers and subco=
ntractors, all having access to peoples homes and many having worked for AD=
T and other national alarm companies. There's much doubt by legitimate alar=
m installation companies in this area, that any great percentage of them ha=
ve gone through the state required background check. Employee turnover is r=
ampant. =20

So I'll base my argument on just that fact alone.

What are the chances some one of them might use this device? I don't know .=
... but the chances would be zero with out the product being made available=
 to just anyone who might want to do harm to a former employer or end user.=
 And you give a lot of credit to someone who would do something like that b=
y presuming they would have the sense to understand that they "might" not g=
et away with it. =20

The premise that seems to be too hard for you to appreciate is that if the =
product wasn't available there wouldn't be any chance of it being used for =
nefarious purposes at all and that the manufacturer obviously doesn't care.=
 Can you imagine what a miniscule market this device has, to make it even w=
orth manufacturing? So "what else" might it be used for if not only for leg=
itimate purposes? Do you think that the manufacturer "should" make a produc=
t like this if it even remotely provides a means for alarms systems to be i=
llegitimately bypassed? I don't think so. But, of course there's always som=
eone who thinks that "everything" is ok to do.=20

You personify the probability that ethics is well on it's way of becoming o=
bsolete.


alt.security.alarms Main Index | alt.security.alarms Thread Index | alt.security.alarms Home | Archives Home