Alright, so to note:
The current setup is Analog Pelco Cameras, on Pelco 16 Channel 8000 DVR's running their dumbed down version of windows with a netscreen firewall -- the goal for this company was to move to IP cameras in the long run by recommendations anyhow. While it would not be financially reasonable to replace all cameras (over 250), it would be reasonable to replace the full DVR system if it were an improvement (hardware and software).
I noted budget is not an issue -- but my comment regarding cost effectiveness still stands. The client is willing to pay for a high end system, from a personal opinion buying something more aggressive than a Juniper netscreen (though I personally like sonic wall since the netscreen doesn't have fallback IP) for a system that seems broken feels like a bandaid on a bullet wound. Those DVR's run 7000+ decked out, not including the expenses for cameras. We willing to have casino quality if it is just that, casino quality.
In regards to the software, Pelco verified it cannot run anti-virus while recording. If anti-virus is needed to run, the recording shuts down as the framerate is unrealistic. This is a limitation of the software then, if needed.
Of what I know, ports 80 and 9999 (not through 9999 -- my apologies if that was mis typed) are required open. The scenario worked like so:
Speakeasy verified worm activity on the static IP, and we shut down the unit and verified the virus -- Pelco came out, wiped the system clean (disconnected), reinstalled fresh, reinstalled the router (verified) -- system received a worm, again, within a few days. The process continued twice by Pelco representatives.
It is not a full version of windows that can be maintained in the same way, a limiation we're not happy with either. I'll take the blame that there are more experienced windows users than me -- but as a reminder, I didn't set this guy up, I'm coming in near the end -- so blaming me for the weakness in this system is unfounded.
Regardless, Pelco verified the limiation in their software, and I'll agree this is a reason why we've shyed away, and continue to shy away, from a windows setup. Lack of updates, lack of patched software -- all a limitation of their application -- and I'll argue, a continual frustration with Windows in general....So I feel like half the feedback here is targeted towards helping me find alternative solutions or teaching me improved methods, and the other half protecting the Windows OS from being bashed as a insecure box compared to Mac and Linux. Regardless of what side you're on, if you want to boast windows, pitch me a software package (or hardware solution), the current stuff isn't staying in this fashion.
As previously noted, no filtered IP's, VPN not preferred.
I appreciate the emails and positive support from both sides of the camp -- it is being read, thank you. This is the best information we've received so far, and we've contacted as many people as we could here in San Francisco. Please continue to send me informative posts and emails.
I've heard this from other developers -- noting that the Linux systems seem to be cheap home grown creations. Do you have a PC version you'd recoommend us to look?
typing too fast indeed:), thank you
The software from Pelco Requires admin privleges, and filtering via IP is questionable by some remote users. Do you have any PC software you recommend?
Hmmm, you might be right, though we have some floating users that will not be on a static IP but require access in remote locations... which is why we've avoided IP filtering, but I'm sure that can't ALWAYS be the case, and we can lock it down to only static users. VPN is a plausible solution, but has been passed by IT.
"How did me asking a question 'indicate' this type of response?" Might be more inline, but it is the same definition, though it should have been 'denotes' I'll agree.
I'm getting good quality responses -- more so than from Security firms I've talked with in the Bay Area. If you are a consultant experienced in this, I'm happy to connect you with this company, feel free to email me at brady at my website url.
:) I'm a Creative Director, I was asked to help in their search for an alternative. Pelco has verified the DVR's have been known to have this issue, and have not posted an alternative.
As a note, they don't want a free job, they want a pay service -- I'm happy to find it for them... and they don't sell buildings, buy only.
Wow. How did me asking a question denote this type of response? Good to know Slashdot is the place for attacking more than helping... never did I say we were pc gurus, but it's good to know this is the place to go for support without ridicule.
Many people have posted that our experience in windows is probably questionable, and I don't doubt that - Since our servers here are mac/pc related, what do you suggest we do differently to protect our windows computers in a different manner?
I'm sure it's the application -- but at the same time, this would be a mute issues on a linux/mac setup. The only protection those applications have are the routers we put in front of them, which some more high end ones can be unreasonable in remote locations.
Since I submitted this a week ago, some alternative windows companies have submitted improved systems that do not have weaknesses Pelco seems to have, so we shall see!
We are 100% Mac and Linux company, so my known system would not be a dated Windows box dumbed down to only run anti-virus when nothing else works:)
It may very well be a weakness in the software -- the ports required are 80 and 9999, that's it -- Pelco themselves duplicated a virus popping into it with a router up top, and since many of these buildings are remote, the expense is not reasonable to have a high end firewall on most of these remote locations when I could just as easily disregard that mess and log in as a non-root enabled user.
Slashdot Mirror
Alright, so to note: The current setup is Analog Pelco Cameras, on Pelco 16 Channel 8000 DVR's running their dumbed down version of windows with a netscreen firewall -- the goal for this company was to move to IP cameras in the long run by recommendations anyhow. While it would not be financially reasonable to replace all cameras (over 250), it would be reasonable to replace the full DVR system if it were an improvement (hardware and software). I noted budget is not an issue -- but my comment regarding cost effectiveness still stands. The client is willing to pay for a high end system, from a personal opinion buying something more aggressive than a Juniper netscreen (though I personally like sonic wall since the netscreen doesn't have fallback IP) for a system that seems broken feels like a bandaid on a bullet wound. Those DVR's run 7000+ decked out, not including the expenses for cameras. We willing to have casino quality if it is just that, casino quality. In regards to the software, Pelco verified it cannot run anti-virus while recording. If anti-virus is needed to run, the recording shuts down as the framerate is unrealistic. This is a limitation of the software then, if needed. Of what I know, ports 80 and 9999 (not through 9999 -- my apologies if that was mis typed) are required open. The scenario worked like so: Speakeasy verified worm activity on the static IP, and we shut down the unit and verified the virus -- Pelco came out, wiped the system clean (disconnected), reinstalled fresh, reinstalled the router (verified) -- system received a worm, again, within a few days. The process continued twice by Pelco representatives. It is not a full version of windows that can be maintained in the same way, a limiation we're not happy with either. I'll take the blame that there are more experienced windows users than me -- but as a reminder, I didn't set this guy up, I'm coming in near the end -- so blaming me for the weakness in this system is unfounded. Regardless, Pelco verified the limiation in their software, and I'll agree this is a reason why we've shyed away, and continue to shy away, from a windows setup. Lack of updates, lack of patched software -- all a limitation of their application -- and I'll argue, a continual frustration with Windows in general. ...So I feel like half the feedback here is targeted towards helping me find alternative solutions or teaching me improved methods, and the other half protecting the Windows OS from being bashed as a insecure box compared to Mac and Linux. Regardless of what side you're on, if you want to boast windows, pitch me a software package (or hardware solution), the current stuff isn't staying in this fashion.
As previously noted, no filtered IP's, VPN not preferred.
I appreciate the emails and positive support from both sides of the camp -- it is being read, thank you. This is the best information we've received so far, and we've contacted as many people as we could here in San Francisco. Please continue to send me informative posts and emails.
I've heard this from other developers -- noting that the Linux systems seem to be cheap home grown creations. Do you have a PC version you'd recoommend us to look?
That would be true:)
typing too fast indeed:), thank you The software from Pelco Requires admin privleges, and filtering via IP is questionable by some remote users. Do you have any PC software you recommend?
Hmmm, you might be right, though we have some floating users that will not be on a static IP but require access in remote locations... which is why we've avoided IP filtering, but I'm sure that can't ALWAYS be the case, and we can lock it down to only static users. VPN is a plausible solution, but has been passed by IT.
"How did me asking a question 'indicate' this type of response?" Might be more inline, but it is the same definition, though it should have been 'denotes' I'll agree.
I'm getting good quality responses -- more so than from Security firms I've talked with in the Bay Area. If you are a consultant experienced in this, I'm happy to connect you with this company, feel free to email me at brady at my website url.
:) I'm a Creative Director, I was asked to help in their search for an alternative. Pelco has verified the DVR's have been known to have this issue, and have not posted an alternative. As a note, they don't want a free job, they want a pay service -- I'm happy to find it for them... and they don't sell buildings, buy only.
Wow. How did me asking a question denote this type of response? Good to know Slashdot is the place for attacking more than helping... never did I say we were pc gurus, but it's good to know this is the place to go for support without ridicule.
Many people have posted that our experience in windows is probably questionable, and I don't doubt that - Since our servers here are mac/pc related, what do you suggest we do differently to protect our windows computers in a different manner?
I'm sure it's the application -- but at the same time, this would be a mute issues on a linux/mac setup. The only protection those applications have are the routers we put in front of them, which some more high end ones can be unreasonable in remote locations. Since I submitted this a week ago, some alternative windows companies have submitted improved systems that do not have weaknesses Pelco seems to have, so we shall see!
We are 100% Mac and Linux company, so my known system would not be a dated Windows box dumbed down to only run anti-virus when nothing else works:) It may very well be a weakness in the software -- the ports required are 80 and 9999, that's it -- Pelco themselves duplicated a virus popping into it with a router up top, and since many of these buildings are remote, the expense is not reasonable to have a high end firewall on most of these remote locations when I could just as easily disregard that mess and log in as a non-root enabled user.