this post was submitted on 12 Feb 2024
883 points (98.9% liked)

Technology

59495 readers
3110 users here now

This is a most excellent place for technology news and articles.


Our Rules


  1. Follow the lemmy.world rules.
  2. Only tech related content.
  3. Be excellent to each another!
  4. Mod approved content bots can post up to 10 articles per day.
  5. Threads asking for personal tech support may be deleted.
  6. Politics threads may be removed.
  7. No memes allowed as posts, OK to post as comments.
  8. Only approved bots from the list below, to ask if your bot can be added please contact us.
  9. Check for duplicates before posting, duplicates may be removed

Approved Bots


founded 1 year ago
MODERATORS
top 50 comments
sorted by: hot top controversial new old
[–] darkevilmac@lemmy.zip 203 points 9 months ago (8 children)

If you have to run power to it, you might as well run some data as well. Never really the best idea to have mission critical equipment at the mercy of a congested wifi network.

[–] Bonehead@kbin.social 137 points 9 months ago (2 children)

Save some trouble and go with POE. A little more expense to setup, but you only have to run one wire and everything is permanently hardwired.

[–] BearOfaTime@lemm.ee 13 points 9 months ago

I'm hard pushing my family and friends to replace/install POE switches currently. Its a minor cost upgrade that will make my life so much easier

[–] SayJess@lemmy.blahaj.zone 12 points 9 months ago (2 children)

Heck yeah. In addition to POE, I’ve got a power line adapter setup to the NVR so that the cams are all hardwired to the modem/router combo. It’s fast enough for remote viewing in HD.

load more comments (2 replies)
[–] youngalfred@lemm.ee 37 points 9 months ago (12 children)

A lot of the new systems can use battery powered cameras that are motion activated - they can last for a month+ on battery because they only turn fully on when they detect motion.

You're right though - if it's mission critical don't rely on wireless.

[–] jonne@infosec.pub 12 points 9 months ago (1 children)

Some of them even have solar panels as well. It's very useful if you want to DYI installation without having to run cables all over the place (data and/or power).

This Wi-Fi jamming stuff does seem like a huge issue. I was actually considering wireless down the line, but maybe a system with proper wired connections would be better.

[–] 4am@lemm.ee 13 points 9 months ago (2 children)

Power over Ethernet (PoE) requires one wire for both data and power. You also need a PoE network switch, or a “PoE injector” which is basically a power brick that adds power to the network cord.

load more comments (2 replies)
load more comments (11 replies)
[–] akilou@sh.itjust.works 18 points 9 months ago (6 children)

Electricity is already wired throughout, you just need to get to the closest plug. You have to run ethernet the whole length and it has length limitations. It's not trivial.

load more comments (6 replies)
load more comments (5 replies)
[–] yggstyle@lemmy.world 111 points 9 months ago* (last edited 9 months ago) (11 children)

It's been echod several times in this thread already but:

Wireless and security are oil and water. They do not mix. This goes byond wifi. If your security system has wireless sensors (door, window, motion) - you aren't secure. Please do not buy smart locks.

Wireless cameras are not security - they are a convenience. A convenience for checking on the kids in the back or seeing if that package got delivered.

If it's not wired and powered it is at best a scarecrow and at worse an indicator that you have money and you feel secure.

[–] Modern_medicine_isnt@lemmy.world 63 points 9 months ago (14 children)

Smart locks are fine. Your door isn't particularly secure with a regular lock. If they want in enough to bring tech, they are coming in anyway.

[–] yggstyle@lemmy.world 23 points 9 months ago

I don't disagree with that. If someone wants in they're coming in. 100% agreed. The trick is making your self less of an easy target and cutting down on easy ins.

My statement was pretty generic as there is a lot of nuance to locks and security. My concern lies mostly with the fact that you rarely have a suitable blending of the two technologies. Either a lock company buying a kit or an electronics company buying bulk locks. Or a company that does neither and is looking for another thing to peddle on Amazon.

Some of these locks have very poorly positioned relays. You can unlock them with a magnet. Others can be actuated using a simple emf generator. Ones with passcodes can be read with consumer grade ir sensors or determined by wear and fingerprints.

Reducing attack vectors is always preferred. But it is absolutely up to the end user where their balance between convenience and security lies.

A good deadbolt and key while average is still superior as it is only 3ish attack vectors: pick or impression, destruction of door/lock, and the trusty rock:

Most doors have poorly placed windows with standard glass in or next to them.

[–] thisbenzingring@lemmy.sdf.org 20 points 9 months ago (8 children)

They busted the door off the hinges when they broke into my house once. One of your doors is an open in door... those are kick in doors as the guy was telling me when he replaced mine.

load more comments (8 replies)
load more comments (12 replies)
[–] joel_feila@lemmy.world 30 points 9 months ago (3 children)

there was show hosted by reformed burglars. One of the things they look for was expensive things in the front yards, being in planned community with few roads going into or out of. To get past home camera they wore hats and kept looking down, and just showed up in a lawn care or pool cleaning van.

And if you look at police report and court cases, do these camera make catching thieves more likely? No they don't

[–] Takumidesh@lemmy.world 24 points 9 months ago

I don't love somewhere where people dress up as Scooby Doo villains to break into houses, I live in a place where people go house to house at 1 am and try door handles on cars and garages. A motion light and a camera does more to stop those people than anything else.

If someone wants to stage an organized heist, then yea, my camera isn't doing shit, but neither are my door locks, or a bolted down safe. At that point it is just an insurance game.

load more comments (2 replies)
load more comments (9 replies)
[–] mastod0n@lemmy.world 71 points 9 months ago (3 children)

Sorry for being that guy but if possible you should always refrain from using Wifi for applications in production, safety and security. Too many known and unknown vectors to its reliability.

But yea, I get it. Most people don't know the details and on the overall market most affordable devices and services for security systems are some semi-"smart" products which are simple to set up. The extra work and cost that come with professional equipment aren't really appreciated, eapecially by those who don't know any better.

[–] doctorcrimson@lemmy.today 23 points 9 months ago* (last edited 9 months ago) (13 children)

This is exactly why the old fashioned Analog installations cost more to begin with: They're very secure and more difficult to disable.

Of course, the number 1 method to avoid robbery is to simply make yourself an unappealing target: no FB/Instagram stories, door that looks more solid than it is, padlocks, signage warning of dogs/firearms (even if you don't have either). Keep your equipment, cars, or boats inside or covered. Etc. Even just a floodlight that detects motion at night and makes a beep beep sound can scare off most kids and crackheads. If you live in an apartment, put some broken furniture on your patio and people will think you're poor.

It seems like Wifi Cams and the little signs/stickers they come with are exactly the opposite: "I HAVE SOMETHING TO HIDE THAT YOU WANT BUT HAVEN'T SECURED IT PROPERLY."

load more comments (13 replies)
[–] Takumidesh@lemmy.world 18 points 9 months ago (4 children)

I think the most primary thing of all is that, most people don't have the means to run Ethernet cables to places that typical cameras are installed (doorbells and garage floodlights)

It's a catch 22 though. Ok one hand, every single person in my neighborhood has multiple cameras on their property now and even when I lived in an apartment complex, everyone had a camera at their doorbell, but they all are usually ring or some other subscription based, phone home type.

Do WiFi cameras present a new attack vector, yea for sure. Is having a WiFi camera that could be disabled better than not having a camera at all (what was the reality 5 years ago), hard to say.

load more comments (4 replies)
load more comments (1 replies)
[–] archomrade@midwest.social 53 points 9 months ago (1 children)

It drives me up a fucking wall that WiFi is the de-facto local device communication protocol. There are so many reasons not to use it.

[–] Blackmist@feddit.uk 21 points 9 months ago (3 children)

Most home automation stuff seems to use Zigbee. Doesn't have a lot of bandwidth though, so not useful for video.

And frankly, even if you have a video, the police around here won't do shit with it unless someone has been killed.

[–] AngryCommieKender@lemmy.world 19 points 9 months ago

That's because you aren't one of the owner class. The legally supported armed thugs don't protect the citizenry. They protect the owners private and personal property. Your personal property isn't worth protecting in their eyes.

load more comments (2 replies)
[–] gregorum@lemm.ee 52 points 9 months ago (7 children)

oh, sweet, sweet ethernet. how I love you.

load more comments (7 replies)
[–] Treczoks@lemmy.world 49 points 9 months ago (1 children)

Wifi jamming is an easy thing to do, as the whole 2.4GHz band works on the assumption that everyone is nice to each other. One non-cooperative device, and everything in that band goes down: Wifi, BT, Garage door openers, Car key fobs...

[–] MystikIncarnate@lemmy.ca 21 points 9 months ago (9 children)

Vehicle fobs are usually not in the 2.4Ghz range, they're usually in the 300-500mhz range.

But yes, there's a lot of assumptions and usually it's right, but it can be wrong also.

Also, fun fact, microwave ovens use very high power 2.45Ghz. so they can do this by simply rigging a microwave to turn on when the door is open, then pointing it at your house at a safe distance, like across the street.

Most companies that make outdoor stuff generally avoid 5Ghz because it's a regulatory nightmare. Some countries allow it, others only allow certain frequencies, others only allow certain frequencies up to a certain power level, others basically don't allow it at all. So all your fancy door bell/cameras/whatever that you connect outside your home are all going to be limited to 2.4 GHz with is basically universally available internationally (it's an ISM band, while the wifi 5ghz is a UNII band).... So yeah, good luck everybody!

Also wired cameras and such exist, they're a pain to install, but they work well, and the market for other outdoor network connected things is extremely limited.... Things like doorbells.

I hate putting static objects on wifi, even something like my TV, I want it wired simply because it never moves and there's no reason to use it wirelessly. I can run a wire to it once and even if I upgrade the TV, the wire still works. To explain this a little more, I'm an IT administrator and I have a specialty in wireless networking. As tersely as I can: more stuff on the WiFi makes it slow, so if something can be wired, it should be wired. Obviously there are things that are not well suited to it, like cellphones and laptops, but pretty much everything else should be wired. TVs, set top boxes, desktop computers... Basically anything that can be wired, that doesn't regularly move around.... Wired. This extends to cameras, doorbells, gdo's....

This frees up wireless bandwidth for devices that are obligated to use it, like your phone and tablet.

I've seen a lot of network issues resolved by simply plugging in everything that's practical to plug in, even if the device having the issue wasn't one of the things plugged in.

load more comments (9 replies)
[–] andrew_bidlaw@sh.itjust.works 41 points 9 months ago

Internet-of-Thieves devices.

[–] kelargo@lemmy.world 33 points 9 months ago (16 children)

Use POE Ethernet. Problem solved.

load more comments (16 replies)
[–] randomaside@lemmy.dbzer0.com 32 points 9 months ago

Idk if it's worth trusting articles from this site after the fake ddos toothbrush article.

Nonetheless, I can't imagine crime not getting more sophisticated as time moves on.

POE cameras are the way.

[–] phoenixz@lemmy.ca 29 points 9 months ago (10 children)

I never understood wifi cameras, because yes of course it's super easy to jam them. You need a power cable there anyway, is a data cable then really such a hassle?

[–] apex32@lemmy.world 19 points 9 months ago (2 children)

Yes. With WiFi cameras you don't need to run any cable, just plug in to the nearest power outlet. That's very appealing to people.

load more comments (2 replies)
[–] Michal@programming.dev 13 points 9 months ago

I have a wifi camera. It saves locally to sd card. When it's jammed, it won't be accessible, but it'll still record motion, so recording will be accessible as long as camera itself isn't stolen.

load more comments (8 replies)
[–] lemming741@lemmy.world 20 points 9 months ago

The picture shows a bullet cam, and PoE is readily available.

Wired network doorbell cameras are much harder to find, and they are double the cost

[–] TimeSquirrel@kbin.social 20 points 9 months ago* (last edited 9 months ago)

I've been saying this since the Nest and other similar bullshit came out. In the electronic security industry, we've been installing hardwired PoE cams for over a decade and a half. High resolution, high bandwidth, no batteries or separate power adapters, centrally managed LOCAL video storage. And not vulnerable to RF jamming/hacking. Stop buying the shitty Harry Homeowner equipment.

In the 80s and 90s stores used to put up signs that read "monitored by CLOSED CIRCUIT television" because even back then they didn't trust wireless and they made sure you knew it wasn't.

[–] rekabis@lemmy.ca 19 points 9 months ago (2 children)

And that’s why hardlining is still by far the best option available.

  1. Hardlined cameras need to be physically accessed and the cables snipped in order to disrupt them, and most cameras offering hardlining now feed Ethernet through their bases, providing additional protection.
  2. Most sub-20 camera systems can run for up to an hour or two on a 500VA UPS, and up to a week or more with PowerWall backups, defeating intentional power outages.
  3. A fully airgapped system can defeat any sort of direct Internet intrusion.
  4. Shielded Ethernet can help protect from crosstalk attacks provided they are correctly grounded with the appropriate switches.
  5. Hardware auth between cameras and the DVR can help defend against direct attacks via an unplugged cable or an open wall jack, in that only approved hardware can make the needed connections with either end.
  6. Encrypted communications between cameras and DVR can enhance the security of data across the wire.
  7. A brace of identical dummy cameras - similarly powered, if they have external indicators - alongside real ones will waste the time and effort of attackers who conduct physical attacks, while keeping recording-infrastructure needs to a minimum.
  8. Bonus if identical but “dark” Ethernet is similarly spoofed throughout the building, as not only will it confuse physical attackers, but it’ll also be already in-place for future communications-infrastructure improvements.
  9. DVR needs to be in a secured location, ideally fireproof. In combination with № 7 and № 8, a dummy DVR (with live screens showing actual content) can exist elsewhere to distract any physical attackers.

Sure, this list isn’t 100% coverage, but it gets you nearly there with a minimum of effort.

[–] hydroptic@sopuli.xyz 45 points 9 months ago (15 children)

You have some interesting ideas about what a minimum of effort looks like

load more comments (15 replies)
[–] metaStatic@kbin.social 14 points 9 months ago (1 children)

minimum of effort

yeah, nah, they can just have my stuff.

load more comments (1 replies)
[–] Dhrystone@infosec.pub 15 points 9 months ago (2 children)

This is the reason that all of mine are hardwired (literally) through the roof. Obviously more timeconsuming to do but the signal is way more responsive than wifi (esp. when my wifi bandwidth drops due to giant periodic cloud backups or multi-gigabyte PS5 update file downloads) and I wanted to make sure that all of the video is shunted to cloud and local secure storage in whatever seconds it might take for an attacker to physically disable the camera. Dozen cables down and into my router and switch in the mancave but it is what it is.

load more comments (2 replies)
[–] db2@lemmy.world 15 points 9 months ago (8 children)

as tech becomes cheaper and easier to acquire

I didn't know an improperly sealed microwave oven was such a difficult thing to get ones hands on.

load more comments (8 replies)
[–] Fallenwout@lemmy.world 15 points 9 months ago (2 children)

Isn't this easily detectable?

The camera sends a ping every 30sec to the host. Missing ping: sound silent alarm with possible tampering. Missing 4 pings, let all hell break loose alarm sound.

That is how my sensors work. They work on 433/868mhz, this is open band and easy to flood. If the hub misses a ping from a sensor, the tamper protection alarm goes of.

[–] Lightfire228@pawb.social 20 points 9 months ago (2 children)

I feel like that would cause false positives

Then again, not that many people mess with their router

[–] GreatAlbatross@feddit.uk 16 points 9 months ago

If I got an alarm every time a 433 sensor didn't check in for 10 minutes, I'd never get any sleep!

load more comments (1 replies)
load more comments (1 replies)
[–] RemembertheApollo@kbin.social 12 points 9 months ago (9 children)

Running wires is expensive. That's why most people opt for wireless, and on top of that, the convenience systems like Ring offer with their app, no NVR/DVR, none of the typical security system hardware cluttering things up.

load more comments (9 replies)
load more comments
view more: next ›