MONA T. RONICS

Jim no need to get all worked up.. The "ole boy" isn't worth the effort... By his own words he isn't concerned with the end user, just that monthly from the service company..

The service company is concerned with the end user.. Those or our friends and neighbors.

Such a thing doesn't exist for the "mleuck's" out there..

So, my advice or two cents worth, forget him, put him on your block list, (I did)..

Same as with Robert from years gone by...

Life's to short to get all worked up by a troll..

RTS

Reply to
RTS
Loading thread data ...

Well ya see .... typing vitriolic and acrimoniously and actually "feeling" that way are two separate things. He doesn't actually "bother" me. But nast y people just have to be put down.

I'm really a very nice guy. I get along with most people. Bass was an insti gator and intentionally brought disruption to this and a number of other gr oups he participated in, and so does this other asshole. Well if he can do it, I can do it better. Disruption is disruption. If it's practiced by one person in a group, what difference does it make who else does it?

He is every bit as dysfunctional as Bass was and deserves every bad thing t hat can happen to him.

Who knows? Perhaps fate will be kind again and allow him to die also.

That's a comforting thought.

Reply to
Jim Davis

" that way are two separate things. He doesn't actually "bother" me. But na sty people just have to be put down.

tigator and intentionally brought disruption to this and a number of other groups he participated in, and so does this other asshole. Well if he can d o it, I can do it better. Disruption is disruption. If it's practiced by on e person in a group, what difference does it make who else does it?

that can happen to him.

Funny you should mention that I've had this persistent cough.....

Reply to
mleuck

I don't recall saying I wasn't concerned with the end user, I just said I was concerned with what went on the central station, every central station is including the one Jim used, I've yet to find any central station that allowed anyone to put anything on

Duh it's part of their job

You make baseless accusations concerning 2 companys about something you know nothing about then just as quickly run away, so be it

Reply to
mleuck

QUOTE #1: You can believe what you wish that was the intended purpose of l ocking the phone and account numbers, same reason other companies like P1, ADT etc did 1) Well, lets see, I started out in this industry as an ADT installati on manager, and I can tell you that ADT has their own specific installer co de, but they did not have it 'Chip-Proofed' as Mona has in the past and sti ll presently does. Neither did ADT ever lock their systems in the DSC insta lls by enabling the installer lock option. In the old Ademco version, yes, the installer code if you defaulted the panel was restored to their specifi c installer code, but anyone could get back into the system by powering dow n and holding * & # together to get into programming. Then, anyone could th en program their own installer code. There was never any portion of the pro gramming that was totally off limits as Mona still presently does and has d one thru the use of a special chip because of the torrid relationship with her Honey. Additionally, the telephone numbers have always been accessible. 2) Protection-1 basically used the Ademco panels also, and there was n o special 'chip-locked-out-certain-locations' hanky-panky going on.

Seems obvious to anyone who has actually tried to takeover a Mona syst em, and there are many out there, that Mona just could not trust her unsusp ecting lovers and actually shackled them with a chip-chastity belt...they w ere either going to be for her alone or, no one was going to have them!

QUOTE #2: The installer code was defaulted allowing anyone to monitor the things so have fun walking around in those big boots AND Those systems can be taken over just like any other system

In the Mona chips, what is the point of the installer code being acces sible if the new company taking over the system cannot change the telco num bers? Remember, we are talking about systems that are still going to be usi ng a telco line, whether it is a POTS line or the simulated type Comcast/AT T generated telco lines.

QUOTE: Depends on the panel, with Honeywell no I doubt few companies did a t least I never heard of them doing it, GE/ITI/Interlogix yes very possible and it did happen

So, here you say/admit that no companies that you know of, were able t o takeover a Mona/Honey system...at least you never heard of them doing it. S---o, is this not exactly what I was talking about or did you not underst and or grasp what I have been trying to say?

It's not complicated. 'Mona' is very jealous, and imposes a "Chastity- Chip" on all of her customers, and partners with her 'Honey' who basically racks in double-profits thru the scheme.

...and any other company that behaves in this same specific way with a ny other manufacturer is equally guilty of jilting millions of consumers and thousands of installation companies.

...I see a large class-action suit potential here. Some discerning lar ge legal firm is going to be making a lot of money someday... just saying !

... and Mr. Mark Eugene Leuck of Monitronics International Inc., it's no wo nder that you are trying to defend 'Mona', you've got cookie crumbs all ove r your shirt!

Have a Happy 57th birthday, I believe, in about a couple of months! Ar e you still in Texas?

By the way, the original post read something like this,

"Just curious of what other 'INSTALLERS' think"

...I never asked what 'Mona' collaborators thought of it. I already knew that.

To all installers that have had to deal with this 'Mona' company, would you like to know how to get into any 'Mona' system???

Awaiting your replies.

PS. I may be slow at times to respond because I am always extremely busy, b ut I will respond. Goodnight.

Reply to
ED

locking the phone and account numbers, same reason other companies like P1 , ADT etc did

tion manager, and I can tell you that ADT has their own specific installer code, but they did not have it 'Chip-Proofed' as Mona has in the past and s till presently does. Neither did ADT ever lock their systems in the DSC ins talls by enabling the installer lock option. In the old Ademco version, yes , the installer code if you defaulted the panel was restored to their speci fic installer code, but anyone could get back into the system by powering d own and holding * & # together to get into programming. Then, anyone could then program their own installer code. There was never any portion of the p rogramming that was totally off limits as Mona still presently does and has done thru the use of a special chip because of the torrid relationship wit h her Honey. Additionally, the telephone numbers have always been accessibl e.

no special 'chip-locked-out-certain-locations' hanky-panky going on.

stem, and there are many out there, that Mona just could not trust her unsu specting lovers and actually shackled them with a chip-chastity belt...they were either going to be for her alone or, no one was going to have them!

e things so have fun walking around in those big boots

essible if the new company taking over the system cannot change the telco n umbers? Remember, we are talking about systems that are still going to be u sing a telco line, whether it is a POTS line or the simulated type Comcast/ ATT generated telco lines.

at least I never heard of them doing it, GE/ITI/Interlogix yes very possib le and it did happen

to takeover a Mona/Honey system...at least you never heard of them doing i t. S---o, is this not exactly what I was talking about or did you not under stand or grasp what I have been trying to say?

y-Chip" on all of her customers, and partners with her 'Honey' who basicall y racks in double-profits thru the scheme.

wonder that you are trying to defend 'Mona', you've got cookie crumbs all o ver your shirt!

Are you still in Texas?

ou like to know how to get into any 'Mona' system???

but I will respond. Goodnight.

========================= ===================

I use the dealer code (like most) to keep anyone from messing with the prog ram. It is my practice however, to deprogram the system should the account leave for any reason. Only time I don't is when they don't pay or if they l eave without notice. If possible I try to pick up the new occupants but if not, and if convenient and if they allow it, I will default the panel for t hem in case they ever want to reactivate it or do a DIY system.

I've had a few occasions where the new owners installer will call asking fo r the programming code at which point I will make arrangements to download the panel if they or the previous owners have left on good terms. Most time s I find that other installers will be likewise accommodating when the situ ation is reversed. Not always .... but most times.

However, now with cellular ...... that has all become a moot point, so I've not been so diligent lately.

I've had a few times where after a period of time the new owners are not ha ppy with their brother in law installer or their alarm company drops out of business or they have an issue with their central station and they remembe r the cooperation and feel they want to try someone else ...... I've picked up an account. Not often ..... but it has happened. Off the top of my head , there are at least 4 customers that I've picked up that way. One I've had for about 18 - 20 years now.

Reply to
Jim Davis

QUOTE: I use the dealer code (like most) to keep anyone from messing with the program. It is my practice however, to deprogram the system should the account leave for any reason. Only time I don't is when they don't pay or i f they leave without notice. If possible I try to pick up the new occupants but if not, and if convenient and if they allow it, I will default the pan el for them in case they ever want to reactivate it or do a DIY system.

I've had a few occasions where the new owners installer will call asking fo r the programming code at which point I will make arrangements to download the panel if they or the previous owners have left on good terms. Most time s I find that other installers will be likewise accommodating when the situ ation is reversed. Not always .... but most times.

However, now with cellular ...... that has all become a moot point, so I've not been so diligent lately.

I've had a few times where after a period of time the new owners are not ha ppy with their brother in law installer or their alarm company drops out of business or they have an issue with their central station and they remembe r the cooperation and feel they want to try someone else ...... I've picked up an account. Not often ..... but it has happened. Off the top of my head , there are at least 4 customers that I've picked up that way. One I've had for about 18 - 20 years now.

Hi Jim,

-----We do basically the same thing for security reasons. The programming i s locked out while they are a customer and the installer code can be given out to anyone that calls from the premises, or that can be identified over a cellphone. The box is screwed shut top & bottom with paper seals on top o f the screws, overlapping the door and the main box. The seals have warning s and company name on them, this way we know if anyone has opened the box f or any reason.

The reason that we can give out the installer code to any company out there that happens to take over the system at a later date, is that we use one o f 10,000 possible code combinations for any customer. This saves from havin g to actually change the code back to default. By developing/using your own algorithm to generate an installer code for each customer, you prevent any one from giving away or discovering your installer code, since they are all different. How many times I have heard someone say that so and so company' s installer code is xxxx, isn't even funny. Since we can get into just abou t any system, we record the code for faster take-overs in the future. It mu st be close to 95% of companies that use the same installer code for every customer. Also, it is not wise to use the account number as the installer c ode either. It appears that some companies seem to think that no one will k now, yes, just like those customers who think that no one will know that th ey are using the default code of 1234.

You can use your own unique way to generate 'the' installer code for a spec ific customer. It can be as complicated as your own imagination, or as simp le as a number picked out of the air-just as long as you also record it som ewhere in triplicate in distinct places. It may seem superfluous to some a nd unwarranted, but it sure is less work and worry than some company target ing your customers because they got a hold of your unique installer code.

I am thinking of leveling the playing field in the area of companies that u se "chastity chips" enabled mainboards. I see no need to keep the informati on to myself, nor to worry about repercussions.

Yet, I am concerned that if the 'Mona' type companies get to know their wea knesses, by publicly revealing how to circumvent them, then they would find a way to strengthen the 'locks' on their products that are sold to unsuspe cting consumers. It is much the same way as what intelligence agencies have to go thru, you never want to reveal what you know, when you know, and how you know it.

Perhaps you or someone out there may think of a way to overcome this possib ility. I have some ideas, but I would like some input from bonafide compani es out there first.

ED

Reply to
ED

locking the phone and account numbers, same reason other companies like P1 , ADT etc did

tion manager, and I can tell you that ADT has their own specific installer code, but they did not have it 'Chip-Proofed' as Mona has in the past and s till presently does. Neither did ADT ever lock their systems in the DSC ins talls by enabling the installer lock option. In the old Ademco version, yes , the installer code if you defaulted the panel was restored to their speci fic installer code, but anyone could get back into the system by powering d own and holding * & # together to get into programming. Then, anyone could then program their own installer code. There was never any portion of the p rogramming that was totally off limits as Mona still presently does and has done thru the use of a special chip because of the torrid relationship wit h her Honey. Additionally, the telephone numbers have always been accessibl e.

ADT software has the ability to lock the phones by downloading and I've run into several of them out in the field, I'm referring to the old Vista-10AD T series

no special 'chip-locked-out-certain-locations' hanky-panky going on.

You are wrong, the 250P1, 300P1 and 320P1 all have that capability

stem, and there are many out there, that Mona just could not trust her unsu specting lovers and actually shackled them with a chip-chastity belt...they were either going to be for her alone or, no one was going to have them!

I'm sure people take over our systems all the time, don't know why you seem to have a problem with it

e things so have fun walking around in those big boots

essible if the new company taking over the system cannot change the telco n umbers? Remember, we are talking about systems that are still going to be u sing a telco line, whether it is a POTS line or the simulated type Comcast/ ATT generated telco lines.

Again the system can be unlocked and programmed like any other panel, you s eem ignorant on the process

at least I never heard of them doing it, GE/ITI/Interlogix yes very possib le and it did happen

to takeover a Mona/Honey system...at least you never heard of them doing i t. S---o, is this not exactly what I was talking about or did you not under stand or grasp what I have been trying to say?

I don't think you know what you are trying to say, I stated I never heard o f them doing it which doesn't mean it hasn't been done

y-Chip" on all of her customers, and partners with her 'Honey' who basicall y racks in double-profits thru the scheme.

Anyone can change a board and take over the account any time they want, boa rd costs are cheap so exactly what is scheme? > ...and any other company that behaves in this same specific way wit h any

Gee it's been what 20 years now? I seriously doubt it

wonder that you are trying to defend 'Mona', you've got cookie crumbs all o ver your shirt!

Are you still in Texas?

Gosh I've been discovered whatever will I do?

You got the company name wrong and while you seem to know everything about me you don't know what state I live?

Reply to
mleuck

Irving, Texas right?

Reply to
drosef

Cabling-Design.com Forums website is not affiliated with any of the manufacturers or service providers discussed here. All logos and trade names are the property of their respective owners.