SecurityInfoWatch.com Blogs

Photo credit Timothy O’Rourke of the New York Times, taken at the China Public Security Expo.

Okay, so I nearly had my license to blog revoked because it’s been something like 7 weeks since I last posted. Sorry, folks… I guess I know what my New Year’s Resolution is for 2008!

Now that I have that piece of uncomfortable business out of the way, I wanted to address the video surveillance system being built for next summer’s 2008 Olympics in China. For more than a year now I’ve been reading how, when completed, it will be the largest and most advanced video surveillance system in the world. Given the fact that this system would be deployed for the world’s most celebrated sporting events and ceremonies, the Olympics, I was pretty excited about the system and all of the potential benefits it could bring.

But now the focus is turning to the political ramifications of this video surveillance system and exactly how it will be used after the 2008 Olympics are long gone. Furthermore, American companies that are aiding in this 2008 Olympics video surveillance project could come under increased criticism, much like Microsoft, Yahoo, and Google have been criticized at times for their business efforts in China. As with any technology, there is always the potential for it to be used for good or bad.

Something to keep an eye out for next year is how mainstream media outlets start to cover this story. Here’s an excerpt of an article I just read in the Interational Herald Tribune:

With athletes and spectators coming from around the world, every Olympic host nation works to build the best security system it can. In an era of heightened terrorism concerns, it could be argued, high-tech surveillance systems will be an indispensable part of China’s security preparations. And given China’s enormous economic potential, corporations are always anxious to get a foothold here; the Olympics provide a prime opportunity.

But as the first authoritarian regime to host an Olympics since the former Yugoslavia in 1984, China also presents particular challenges. Long after the visitors leave, security industry experts say, the surveillance equipment Western companies leave behind will provide authorities here new tools to track not only criminals, but dissidents too.

Looks like video surveillance cameras will be an even hotter international story next year.

-Greg

Is the increasing availability of DIY (do it yourself) video surveillance equipment a road sign for the professional installing firm?

Step back about a decade, and you might recall some IT integrators worrying that the influx of low-end, “plug-and-play” routers and switches might mean that entire corporate networks could be built without needing specialized knowledge. Those worries obviously proved wrong, as the integrators and super-knowledgeable in-house staff have only become more necessary as the technology improved. Simultaneously, traffic expanded and needs became more complex.

Now, in the last couple years, we have seen a massive number of consumer-level surveillance cameras launched, especially consumer-level “network” cameras. I call these consumer-level cameras because they can be set up by your average business or homeowner, and there’s no need to get highly specific recording equipment, matrixes or encoders/decoders. Like the old cheap-o cameras you could plug into your family’s VCR, this market is centered on the ability to “Do It Yourself.” What does the continued expansion of this market area mean for the “professional” installing companies? I’ve been wrestling with that question for a couple days now and here is what I’ve concluded:

• These lower-end systems may whet the appetite for the complex, integrated professional systems.
• They’re going to whet the appetite because consumer-level, user-managed systems promise to throw in a kink somehow — maybe the user updates his/her PC’s operating system and the camera no longer is accessible or no longer records clips.
• The nicer DIY systems ARE going to take away some sales your installing business might have landed at small businesses.
• But you probably lost that sale because you never called upon that potential client anyway, and when they had the need for video, they decided it was easier to buy a product direct from Black Box Networks than to look up security firms in a phonebook.
• More camera production to meet consumer demand could mean that prices drop on the equipment across the board (pro-level and consumer), however, your expertise for installing professional-grade equipment won’t be any less valuable.
• Smaller tech and consumer product distributors might get a leg up on the old standby distributors.
• They can do that because they already have the relationship with the consumer tech product manufacturers.
• Eventually these DIY manufacturers will spec some true pro-grade equipment.

Proof that this might be right? I was speaking with a North Carolina integrator this weekend and asking him how he started into security. Formerly, he was running a computer sales and service business, plus doing some structured wiring for new homes. One day, he received a call from a friend with a restaurant who was having a problem with employee theft and who wanted to go to Sam’s Club and buy a surveillance camera system. That restaurant owner called up this integrator and asked him if those DIY systems were OK.

My friend, the security integrator, spent time researching product lines and came back to his friend and installed a professional system with a DVR. His friend the restaurant owner caught a couple employees walking out with money and goods within the week, making the video installation an instant success. Since then, this integrator has expanded his business into DVR-based video surveillance and electronic door access control systems. If there was ever better anecdotal proof that DIY can create professional sales, this must be it.

–Geoff

Cygnus Security Group’s roving photog Jim Benesh dropped us an email with a few scenes from this weekend’s California Alarm Association annual winter convention. The CAA winter convention is reportedly a great place to catch up with old friends as well as talk business with potential partners. Pardon the lack of captions (or use the “comments” feature to supply your own)!

-Geoff

Steve Bragg of SAI with CAA Executive Director Jerry Lenander. 

Jarrett Morgan of Rapid Response Monitoring. 

Steve Bragg of SAI.

Mark Matlock and Tyke Burgwald of United Central Control. 

NBFAA President George Gunning, CAA Past President Frank Burke and Eleanor Few, Sr. of Legacy Security Services. 

Gary Zatz of Altronix. 

Woodie Andrawos and Todd Shuff of National Monitoring Center. 

Deanna Blair and Kevin McArthy of Emergency24. 

Debbie Miller of Moon Security, Tonja and Chris Jenkins of NBFAA, Nancy Franco of ESX and NBFAA Executive Director Merlin Guilbeau promote ESX. 

The financial market panel featured Jim Wooster, Jr., Alarm Financial Services; Mark Melendes, La Salle Bank; Will Schmidt, Capital Source; and George Ramirez, Union Bank, with moderator Tony Smith of Security Finance Associates.

It’s a interesting idea — one that I teased briefly on this blog some time ago. Adam Rifkin’s move “Look” opens on Dec. 14, and it’s one that I can’t wait to see.

So, here’s the premise: A movie that is shot entirely from the angles that surveillance cameras use. A camera in the corner of the office, one behind the cash register, the one at your ATM: these are the kind of angles that Rifkin puts his movie’s cameras, even using lens arrangements to give the type of footage you’re accustomed to seeing from these cameras.

The flick apparently has no big-name stars (following the premise, I suppose, that you and I and everyone else are the daily stars of video surveillance) and the core supposition of the movies is that “when you think you’re alone, maybe you’re not.” Is there a critique of surveillance systems in this movie? Or perhaps a real examination of where cameras belong and where they don’t? I don’t know; we’re going to have to wait a couple days and find out (Keep in mind this is a limited release, starting in New York and Los Angeles, and then heading to Chicago on Dec. 21.).  

If you want to watch the movie trailers, go here, or just go to the main site for “Look: The Movie” and read up.

-Geoff

I was over at the Terminal 23 blog (”ghosts in the wire”). It’s an interesting tech blog and I’m surprised I’d never stumbled upon it before. The writer (Michael, that’s all I know) had a great blog post titled “Has security gently guided technology development?”

The implied answer is “Yes,” and he seems to speculate that if this guidance runs its full course, we might have “a return to dummy terminals, only this time enabled on the Internet through the browser”

I’m not sure it’s all because of security (I think convenience, cost, and ease of management are the other factors driving this guidance), but it’s interesting to speculate upon. We’ve already seen this starting in the physical security world, where some access control systems no longer need a central software system running on a PC, but rather pull all their information from a web-enabled panel at the door. Dummy terminals for end users indeed.

I think Terminal 23 implies a critique of this model, but if you step away from the gripe that we might be creating a bland world for computing, I think he has a fairly persuasive “10,000-foot view” on this technology change. Read Terminal 23’s full post on technology guidance by security.

–Geoff

I was on an analyst call recently about “security convergence” and the analyst basically defined security convergence as the adoption of TCP/IP-based security technology (network cameras, web-based access control). That’s one way to define security convergence, but there are a number of other ways to write it out before sliding it into Merriam-Webster’s heavy book:

• Define it by departments: Security convergence is the merging of the IT department’s security concerns with those of the physical security department.

• Define it by business goals: Security convergence is the alignment of security with an organization’s business goals and needs. 

• Define it by inter-linking: Security convergence is the integration of varied technologies so they talk to each other.

• Define it by TCP/IP (as the analyst did): Security convergence is about putting security devices on the network.

All these different definitions work, depending on which angle you’re coming from. If you’re an analyst who sells reports to vendors, they want to think of convergence from a product perspective, as either defined by integration or migration to TCP/IP. If you’re a CSO or an IT director, then you define it by the former two (business goals and departmental organization).

How do you define security convergence in your business area? Tell us via the comments box.

–Geoff

You may have heard from some that the conventional fire alarm panel is dead. I don’t agree. In fact, conventional panels certainly fill a need in the marketplace. Sure, addressable panels may offer more intelligence and the ability to pinpoint alarms and include additional supervisory circuitry, but not every application needs all the advantages that these types of fire systems offer, along with the higher price tag.

Again, as with everything in the security industry, it all goes back to selecting the right product for the application. Conventional panels are no slouches, they have been updated with new features and functions and are more robust then ever. They are easy to control and maintain and service and fit well with applications that are on a smaller scale — think Mom and Pop stores or single-office development companies and such. There are tons of applications for conventional panels, so why should we ‘throw the baby out with the bathwater?’  Conventional panels are cost effective and affordable and ‘just what the doctor’s office may have ordered,’ pun intended. 

Manufacturers will agree. While much of their development dollars have gone into addressable and multiplexed panels, they still continue to support conventional fire systems and see their need in the marketplace.

Any good security or fire system installation starts with a thorough walk-through of the property and evaluation of existing technologies. But don’t shortchange yourself by only looking at the latest products. The reason conventional fire alarm systems are still around is that they are reliable and the perfect life safety solution for some properties. Let me know your thoughts.—Deborah O’Mara, editor, SECURITY Dealer magazine