Frequency hazards

In August's edition of Security Installer, (Bench Test 2 – Interface of the future), the end of the overall assessment finished with the comment: "One day, radio alarm equipment will use a standardised frequency and technology so that transmitters and receivers from every manufacturer will be as interchangeable as latter day PIRs SABs and control panels."

Whilst this may initially seem like a very good idea, I also see hazards in taking this route with wirefree systems.

  1. If all the wirefree systems available operated on exactly the same frequency, systems could very easily end up jamming one another when multiple systems were operated in the same area, unless the duty cycle of the transmitter in each unit was very closely controlled and limited.

2. If an open standard were published criminals maybe able use the standard to access wirefree alarm systems from outside the protected premises either to generate false alarms to downgrade the response to the system or to remotely unset the system before entering.

3. As technology moves on a standard could easily restrict the development of improved encryption technologies, dual frequency technologies and other security enhancements which many manufacturers are developing and rely on to stay ahead of the criminal.

  Generally I have always been keen to work to recognised standards and have always openly encouraged others to the same. With regards to radio frequency used and the level of encryption required only the minimum requirement, specifications should be published and every manufacturer encouraged to exceed these specifications to make their individual systems as secure and reliable as the technology allows.

(The following letter was written before our September edition was published … Ed)