pc based security intrusion and camera system

Hi all.

I have been looking for a PC software based intrusion detection system with the following features. So far, there is nothing I have found in existence that will do this. Does any one have any suggestions?

I have looked at x10 stuff, but it doesn't seem to quite do what I want.

Here are my requirements. I think I have solutions for everything except maybe #2, but maybe there is something out there I haven't found yet.:

  1. PC software based system. Computer will act as central monitoring, storage and communication system

  1. PC will support an external device that will allow legacy motion detectors, glass breakage detectors, door open detectors to be connected to the device, which in turn plugs into the PC via USB cable or similar cable. Thus, the external device can detect if a motion detector is triggered and send a signal to the PC. (This is to alleviate the need to rewire an entire house that has a legacy alarm system). It seems it wouldn't be that hard to build something like this that receives signals and passes them on to the PC. I guess another options would be to use all wireless devices that communicate over IP, but using legacy alarm devices would be much cheaper since they are already in many homes/businesses.

  2. If PC receives a signal /trigger from the device, it can act on that signal based on programmed events. E.g., if PC receives signal that door is opened, the computer can be programmed to send signal to remote device (e.g., x10 device) to turn on certain lights or send an email to a specified email address.

  1. PC should also be able to record IP video, but we wil probably use something such as
    formatting link
    to handle this function. However, it would be nice if the PC detects an intrusion it could also ensure that the camera is recording that event so that it can be remotely viewed.

  2. Using the PC, a user can remotely access the system from any PC in the world if the user is notified of a problem, and the user can view the cameras or event logs to see what caused the trigger.

It seems that in 2007 this isn't that difficult to do, but as I mentioned nothing seems to exist to handle this.

I appreciate any suggestions.

Reply to
ABC
Loading thread data ...

Legacy Alarm? LOL.

You may choose to try and redefine things to be the way you think they should be, but until Microsquish is run out of the business there will never be a PC based alarm that is anywhere near as reliable as a standard simple proprietary alarm control panel.

Now, if you want to try something else instead, you might consider upgrading your alarm panel and keypads to something newer. Something compatible with a home automation package. It would be capable of sending alarm information to your automation software, but would never be dependent on a PC to operate. (You may still not be happy though. Most of those "legacy" alarms that send info to PC like to talk to a "legacy" RS-232 ports.) ROFL.

I suggest you ask about features and options in comp.home.automation There are a lot of guys over there into the DIY automation scene.

Actually there are some panels out there with some pretty cool ethernet add-on modules that can transmit data over LAN WAN or Internet. Just need to find a compatible automation package or write your own interface.

Quit trying to make your PC the center of everything though. PC based recording is is Eh!, but it works ok if you don't do anything else on that PC and you set it up for atleast weekly auto re-boot. Daily would be better.

On the other hand if this is your sole hobby and you like tinkering with it every day and maybe you would have fun making a PC-en-stein and coaxing it along.

Reply to
Bob La Londe

I hate to break it to you, but the technology used in most alarm systems hasn't changed much in 35 years. It is simply lagging because of attitudes such as yours. The newer PoE devices are so far advanced over what existed 10 years ago, you can't even begin to compare. So, legacy...yes.

While I agree that a alarm control panel is probably more reliable, that due to the fact that the features are much more limited. You can keep your attitude that PC/LAN based systems are not the way to go, but you will find yourself out of a job in 10 years.

I would suggest you take a look at the IP based video system coming out now and get with the times. We run one that hasn't been down in over 100 days due to redundant power and solid configuration.

Sure, PC based systems aren't 100% reliable, but a 1 speed bicycle is probably more reliable than a car. Do you still ride around on a 1 speed bicycle.

I didn't think so.

Reply to
ABC

formatting link
formatting link

This isn't hard to do. It may be way beyond the budget you had in mind for time and money.

Reply to
Roland More

Ultimately it comes down to how much you're willing to spend. A 1-speed bike may be slow, but it will also always get you there. For most people, an alarm system isn't something where even 99.99% reliability is good enough.

I do agree that Bob understates the reliability of PC-based systems *in general*. Something running Windoze on a $300 computer will naturally have significantly less reliability than something running an embedded OS on a enterprise-server-grade hardware... but there again it becomes a matter of how much you're willing to spend, as Roland's response points out.

Reply to
Matt Ion

Thanks. I will check these out.

I did actually find something similar to what I was looking for, but still its not a totally effective and complete solution.

formatting link
I do think this type of technology is the future of the industry (particularly residential). Using this device and x10 (or similar technology), you can program your computer when it detects an intruder to turn on your lights, program a dog barking, program a voice to yell, turn on cameras -- virtually anything,

You just can't do all that easily with a convential central alarm system. Sorry.

Also, I am more comfortable working on a pc, than a proprietary central alarm, and I already have a server running 24/7, so a computer in my case is an easy, cost effective solution.

Reply to
ABC

"ABC" wrote in message news: snipped-for-privacy@4ax.com...

Sorry. You just didn't get it, but that's ok. Actually a lot of the components in modern alarm panels didn't even exist 35 years ago, but hey. Still to a certain degree. You are correct. Modern alarm panels tend to use older more reliable tech. Thats a good thing. For security and life safety reliability is very important.

Seriously, all in one soluions are usually not the way to go. Individual or modular systems that communicate work much better and are far more reliable over all. Mainly because Winblows sucks. Then nothing critical is dependent on Windows. I have nothing against a well built PC. The OS is the problem. I've got a 486DX in my back office running PCDOS and running continuously since it was first set up with maybe 6 reboots in all that time. I don't know how many years that has been. I don't think any of the reboots were from PC problems. If somebody had written a popular OS that was stable I would gladly use a PC built to that quality as part of a system. The problem is still the OS. Even if the PCs built today and the operating systems in place were more reliable I would still opt for a modular system with good communications rather than a centralized system that performs multiple different functions all dependent on one processor. All things can fail.

I actually work with this stuff everyday, and have to make things work for people. My biggest number one concern is reliability. Ease of use is always second, but it is important. If its not easy enough then it won't get used.

Anyway, I still think you would be better served by running an automation package and an independent alarm. How you manage your video is a little more nebulous. I've seen that even a purpose built PC running Windows for their OS seem to have problems if not rebooted periodically, and most aren't setup that way by default. I've got embedded OS systems though that have been in continuous service for several years without a single reboot.

Ethernet is a great medium for communications, but its not the end all. Just like telephone is a great medium for communications, but last time I checked you could not reach through the phone with your hammer to drive a nail. LOL. On the other hand you could tell somebody at the other end of the line how to use the hammer, and with ethernet and good applications you could even show them. AND of course if the phone line failed they would still have their hammer. LOL.

Anyway, as I suggested before, you would probably find the most guys to help you wth your project by checking comp.home.automation.

You mention IP products. I use them everyday. They are great, but they do not provide the maximum uptime for critical services if they are totally dependent on the network or worse a single central server also running other critical applications simoultaneously, just like your alarm compoents tied into your PC. An independent system with communication to your PC however would remain functional during all kinds of conditions that would keep your PC from functioning, and you would still have all the conveniences of using your PC during the same amount of time that your PC is working properly.

Reliability, reliability, reliability.... Its not any closed minded viewpoint or lack of imagination. I play with new toys all the time. I've got shelves full of stuff I bought just to try out. For me its about reliability. If I can't get a system that will work pretty much continuously for years unless tampered with by external forces I prefer not to sell it. Its simple minded, but not without thought out or untested.

Of course there is always the human factor. Lets take video recording as an example. An old style VCR (commercial timelapse or VRT) worked. It recorded whatever video was fed into it, and most of the manufacturers reccomended about 10,000 hrs of service between reconditioning the unit. In other words it could run continuously for a little over a year as long as a human changed the tapes. Unfortunately humans are lazy, and complacent. Maybe some aren't routinely, but it shows through at times in almost everybody. The number one cause of failing to get a recording of a critical incident was because nobody bothered to put in a fresh tape in the VCR. Pretty sad. In this case even a single channel DVR is superior even if it has to be rebooted periodically becasue it can be setup to auto reboot, and some of the better embedded OS units will now run longer than the old VCR even with out reboots, and if setup proerly with UPSs and so on they are not dependent on humans who are too lazy, complacent or just plain busy to even learn to use them much less actually do a simple thing like changing the tape once a day. In this case the digital product may not have been mechanically more reliable than the analog (ancient tech) product, but operationally it was more reliable. Now of course you could argue that there are more reliable products than the old tech available today, and I would have to agree, but not all of the new stuff is, and just about all of the old DVRs will still run 10,000 hrs if somebody remembers to change the tapes every day or week or month as setup.

Anyway, in my long winded and no doubt quite boring manner it comes down to this. PCs are not as reliable as they should be, and a modular solution will provide maximum reliabilty and convenience if implemented properly. In spite of limitation in any other "module" of the system. You will have the reliability of the independent system and the convenience of the PC.

Gee, that's about what I said the first time. You just didn't listen because you took offense to the part where I was poking fun at you.

Reply to
Bob La Londe

P.S. We had simple alarm based hardware/software available as freeware almost 20 years ago. When BBSs came into vogue the software was available for download off many of them. I think I first ran across it in some documentation from Heathkit for one of the computers we built when I was a kid. I wrote a simple program to read the status of a switch (all an alarm panel really does) and make noise. Woo, hoo. It used an RS232 port, which back then was quite expensive. It would be pretty simple to extrapolate writing a VB program to run under Windows to monitor a multiple port card in the same way. I mention VB because so few modern "programmers" can write Assembler code and it would be way beyond a user. VB is within the scope of almost anybody to learn Bells and whistles added as needed of course. Remeber my mention earlier of the word modular. Well if you write clean modular code then all kinds of things can be done "as needed" in the future. There are still some hardware issues with my example in this simple solution, but I tend to put out the basic concept and assume an intelligent person can fill in the obvious gaps, like power, newer communication, newer devices, etc.

Of course getting back to my original statement. Many of those problem are overcome by using a regular modern alarm panel paired with a seperate PC running an automation interface program.

Reply to
Bob La Londe

On Aug 12, 8:34 am, ABC wrote:

Actually a lot of the components in modern alarm panels didn't even exist 35 years ago, but hey. Still to a certain degree. You are correct. Modern alarm panels tend to use older more reliable tech. Thats a good thing. For security and life safety reliability is very important.

Seriously, all in one soluions are usually not the way to go. Individual or modular systems that communicate work much better and are far more reliable over all. Mainly because Winblows sucks. Then nothing critical is dependent on Windows. I have nothing against a well built PC. The OS is the problem. I've got a 486DX in my back office running PCDOS and running continuously since it was first set up with maybe 6 reboots in all that time. I don't know how many years that has been. I don't think any of the reboots were from PC problems. If somebody had written a popular OS that was stable I would gladly use a PC built to that quality as part of a system. The problem is still the OS. Even if the PCs built today and the operating systems in place were more reliable I would still opt for a modular system with good communications rather than a centralized system that performs multiple different functions all dependent on one processor. All things can fail.

I actually work with this stuff everyday, and have to make things work for people. My biggest number one concern is reliability. Ease of use is always second, but it is important. If its not easy enough then it won't get used.

Anyway, I still think you would be better served by running an automation package and an independent alarm. How you manage your video is a little more nebulous. I've seen that even a purpose built PC running Windows for their OS seem to have problems if not rebooted periodically, and most aren't setup that way by default. I've got embedded OS systems though that have been in continuous service for several years without a single reboot.

Ethernet is a great medium for communications, but its not the end all. Just like telephone is a great medium for communications, but last time I checked you could not reach through the phone with your hammer to drive a nail. LOL. On the other hand you could tell somebody at the other end of the line how to use the hammer, and with ethernet and good applications you could even show them. AND of course if the phone line failed they would still have their hammer. LOL.

Anyway, as I suggested before, you would probably find the most guys to help you wth your project by checking comp.home.automation.

You mention IP products. I use them everyday. They are great, but they do not provide the maximum uptime for critical services if they are totally dependent on the network or worse a single central server also running other critical applications simoultaneously, just like your alarm compoents tied into your PC. An independent system with communication to your PC however would remain functional during all kinds of conditions that would keep your PC from functioning, and you would still have all the conveniences of using your PC during the same amount of time that your PC is working properly.

Reliability, reliability, reliability.... Its not any closed minded viewpoint or lack of imagination. I play with new toys all the time. I've got shelves full of stuff I bought just to try out. For me its about reliability. If I can't get a system that will work pretty much continuously for years unless tampered with by external forces I prefer not to sell it. Its simple minded, but not without thought out or untested.

Of course there is always the human factor. Lets take video recording as an example. An old style VCR (commercial timelapse or VRT) worked. It recorded whatever video was fed into it, and most of the manufacturers reccomended about 10,000 hrs of service between reconditioning the unit. In other words it could run continuously for a little over a year as long as a human changed the tapes. Unfortunately humans are lazy, and complacent. Maybe some aren't routinely, but it shows through at times in almost everybody. The number one cause of failing to get a recording of a critical incident was because nobody bothered to put in a fresh tape in the VCR. Pretty sad. In this case even a single channel DVR is superior even if it has to be rebooted periodically becasue it can be setup to auto reboot, and some of the better embedded OS units will now run longer than the old VCR even with out reboots, and if setup proerly with UPSs and so on they are not dependent on humans who are too lazy, complacent or just plain busy to even learn to use them much less actually do a simple thing like changing the tape once a day. In this case the digital product may not have been mechanically more reliable than the analog (ancient tech) product, but operationally it was more reliable. Now of course you could argue that there are more reliable products than the old tech available today, and I would have to agree, but not all of the new stuff is, and just about all of the old DVRs will still run 10,000 hrs if somebody remembers to change the tapes every day or week or month as setup.

Anyway, in my long winded and no doubt quite boring manner it comes down to this. PCs are not as reliable as they should be, and a modular solution will provide maximum reliabilty and convenience if implemented properly. In spite of limitation in any other "module" of the system. You will have the reliability of the independent system and the convenience of the PC.

Gee, that's about what I said the first time. You just didn't listen because you took offense to the part where I was poking fun at you.

P.S. We had simple alarm based hardware/software available as freeware almost 20 years ago. When BBSs came into vogue the software was available for download off many of them. I think I first ran across it in some documentation from Heathkit for one of the computers we built when I was a kid. I wrote a simple program to read the status of a switch (all an alarm panel really does) and make noise. Woo, hoo. It used an RS232 port, which back then was quite expensive. It would be pretty simple to extrapolate writing a VB program to run under Windows to monitor a multiple port card in the same way. I mention VB because so few modern "programmers" can write Assembler code and it would be way beyond a user. VB is within the scope of almost anybody to learn Bells and whistles added as needed of course. Remeber my mention earlier of the word modular. Well if you write clean modular code then all kinds of things can be done "as needed" in the future. There are still some hardware issues with my example in this simple solution, but I tend to put out the basic concept and assume an intelligent person can fill in the obvious gaps, like power, newer communication, newer devices, etc.

Of course getting back to my original statement. Many of those problem are overcome by using a regular modern alarm panel paired with a seperate PC running an automation interface program.

-- Bob La Londe Fishing Arizona & The Colorado River Fishing Forums & Contests

formatting link

Reply to
Bob La Londe

Neat answer Bob.

However, Methinks it falls on deaf ears. After all, once reinventing the alarm panel he intends to back it up, using .......

yep ......X10.

Excellent combination.

Reply to
Jim

You can make a reliable alarm with just a few relays, a reliable chargeable power supply, a secure keyswitch or keypad to turn it on and off, and some simple magnetic or PIR sensors, and a digital dialer and/or sounding device. You can even purchase pre-made time-delay circuit boards for entry/exit functions. The basic alarm components have not changed all that much in years.

The computer/microprocessor part is going to mainly add convenience, multiple zones, status indicators, possible remote control, and a whole bunch of other features. It does not necessarily make the overall alarm more reliable, but it does generally make life easier for the installers. It also gives the homeowner a bunch of added value features that he is probably paying a premium for. It also complicates your life when you want to change your monitoring company and need to re-program your system.

Nobody who cares about reliability would want to tie the sensors directly to a Windows comptuter. For one thing, if your are like most computer owners, others have control of your computer when it comes to updates, NOT YOU! We've all experienced the crashes, the untimely reboots, the "System needs to shut down - Do you want to notify Microsoft?" messages. Do you want your mission critical alarm software co-existing in that environment?

Beachcomber

Beachcomber

Reply to
Beachcomber

Umm, that's why you turn off Automatic Updates (or in my case, simply disable the Updates service).

Reply to
Matt Ion

ABC wrote in news:eejub3pn2n758kbdpjd97avel4il1h6sam@

4ax.com:

That's your answer. you are more comfortable with a computer. You can do the things you mentioned with some conventional alarm panels. if you want to build one with a computer, feel free. you asked for opinions, so don't get huffy when you get some that jive with your way of thinking.

Reply to
Tommy

formatting link
> I hate to break it to you, but the technology used in most alarm

Reply to
Roland More

Actually an old associate of mine was working on gaming machine programming a few years back. He used to own a computer store here in Yuma many years ago. Haven't heard from him in a while though so not sure what he is doing these days. Anyway, I am actually aware of some of the OS applications of which you speak. I might have even set up a few linux boxes to play with them and see how they perform. The problem is folks who ask about tying everything under the sun into their PC are usually looking for cheap easy solutions. Hence. Windows box machine and plug in hardware. Yuck.

Somewhere I might even have a copy of Bell Unix for the 386 on five bazillion 720K floppy disks. Actually I think its in the safe from my dad's hardware store. It was the underlying OS for the server for his parts system. It was pretty stable too.

P.S. My education is in CIS and I was running a growing computer service business out of my house when I was dragged kicking and sceaming back into the alarm industry by a client who was trying not to get screwed by my old bosses. I'm not as up to date as a lot of folks in the main stream of the business, but I'm a little more in tune than the average dabler, and I'm more than a power user as I actually know how to write code. Well I usta c'ud write code a decade ago anyway. (A dozen versions of basic, Chasm(assembler for the PC), C+, Cobol, and another half dozen scripting languages) LOL. Have to be honest. I'm really only familiar with 8086/8088 instruction code. It will all run on the newer processors out there, but I don't know the expanded instruction set for the new processors or for Windows (generation whatever) all that well.

Bob La Londe Fishing Arizona & The Colorado River Fishing Forums & Contests

formatting link

Reply to
Bob La Londe

I never took any formal classes in CIS when in college. Back then it was mostly punch card anyway. You are far beyond any level of formal education I have in the computer field. I was a Biology major and Chemistry minor, and got too busy (or lazy) to file a degree plan after about 150 plus hours. What I know now about computers, networks and such is from what this industry has required me to learn.

Reply to
Roland More

Out of your house?!? Say it isn't so. Oh, the humanity! :^)

Reply to
Robert L Bass

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.