Best Buy, Home Depot and Lowes Drop Dahua Lorex Oct 25, 2021 - IPVM and TechCrunch reports

garycrist said:
I am not on any side but, how in the hell is not spying on us?
Click to expand...

This is what IPVM dont tell you. Its always the same stupid phrases from this site. "Hikvision/Dahua" is bad. They detect Uyghur. They spy on us. blablabla
I started hearing little greta crying when reading "ipvm"

After this :

john-ipvm said:
Keeping surveillance systems isolated from the Internet is not a practical general option. Any individual may do so but forcing or requiring them to do so undermines the fundamental value proposition of IP video surveillance.
Click to expand...

You cannot take John from IPVM serious. "Not practical general option".
ANYONE should use proper security to protect his personal data and privacy. Which means not connecting any device directly to the internet i.e. port forwarding. Also cloud services should be avoided at anytime. Not only for security reasons (you lose any control) also because the US gov have access to everything easy which is stored in the cloud.
Many brands on "ipvm"-best-40 (or worst?) list are cloud devices only. Ring? Oh yeah... best alternative.

IPVM got on the same liberal level as CNN&co.
A few years ago i was reading there and had a membership, used their camera calculator and so on. But after all this bullshit started I left.
 
Last edited:
  • Like
Reactions: anijet, JDreaming, bigredfish and 2 others
user8963 said:
You cannot take John from IPVM serious. "Not practical general option".
ANYONE should use proper security to protect his personal data and privacy. Which means not connecting any device directly to the internet i.e. port forwarding. Also cloud services should be avoided at anytime. Not only for security reasons (you lose any control) also because the US gov have access to everything easy which is stored in the cloud.
Click to expand...


What you say makes good sense for optimal security. When I say it is not a "practical general option" I mean it's not practical to ask people and businesses in general to airgap their surveillance devices. This is not my opinion of what should or should not be done. It's the reality of what users want - most users are not very technical and most highly value remote access to their surveillance systems, ergo one way or the other they will be connected to the Internet.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Mark_M
wittaj said:
don't forget he did say this ban is valuable to liberal democracies...
Click to expand...

Lol, that's funny. "Liberal Democracies" means countries like the US, UK, etc. as Wikipedia defines it:

Liberal democracy, also referred to as Western democracy, is the combination of a liberal political ideology that operates under a democratic form of government. It is characterised by elections between multiple distinct political parties, a separation of powers into different branches of government, the rule of law in everyday life as part of an open society, a market economy with private property, and the equal protection of human rights, civil rights, civil liberties and political freedoms for all people.
Click to expand...

It does not mean liberals (e.g. AOC) vs conservatives (e.g. Ted Cruz).
 
The sad thing is that convenience of connection comes at a cost of security that the average consumer has no idea about....and at the same time, even if they were made fully aware of it, they would probably still go with the simple method when given a choice...It is much easier to scan a QR code than it is to set up OpenVPN...
 
  • Like
  • Sad
Reactions: JDreaming, Flintstone61, bigredfish and 3 others
  • Like
Reactions: JDreaming
john-ipvm said:
What you say makes good sense for optimal security. When I say it is not a "practical general option" I mean it's not practical to ask people and businesses in general to airgap their surveillance devices. This is not my opinion of what should or should not be done. It's the reality of what users want - most users are not very technical and most highly value remote access to their surveillance systems, ergo one way or the other they will be connected to the Internet.
Click to expand...
There are thousands of users here many with little to no technical knowledge who configure secure remote access, anyone who installs these systems should be capable of securing them. No one is suggesting an air gap.
 
  • Like
Reactions: anijet, JDreaming, Ssayer and 3 others
fenderman said:
There are thousands of users here many with little to no technical knowledge who configure secure remote access
Click to expand...

I totally believe you that there are thousand of IPCamTalk users who do this. I also know that there are a lot of people, even installers (trunkslammers) who will gladly bunch holes in firewalls to do it quick and easy. I don't think there is any feasible way to stop those people from using devices designed to work on the Internet by the manufacturer in any way (including port forwarding) to stop them.

fenderman said:
No one is suggesting an air gap.
Click to expand...

Well, Hikvision is, see this Hikvision Argues Airgapping And Firewalling Negate FCC Concerns
 
  • Like
Reactions: Flintstone61 and Smilingreen
john-ipvm said:
I totally believe you that there are thousand of IPCamTalk users who do this. I also know that there are a lot of people, even installers (trunkslammers) who will gladly bunch holes in firewalls to do it quick and easy. I don't think there is any feasible way to stop those people from using devices designed to work on the Internet by the manufacturer in any way (including port forwarding) to stop them.



Well, Hikvision is, see this Hikvision Argues Airgapping And Firewalling Negate FCC Concerns
Click to expand...
A false sense of security is worse than no security. My point simply is that all devices need to be secured. Every alternative brand you suggest has had vulnerabilities from axis to uniview. No one HERE is suggesting air-gapping. There is no feasible way to stop people from driving without seatbelts, they do so at their own peril.
 
  • Like
Reactions: JDreaming, Ssayer, TVille and 5 others
I think IPVM does some good work, but their constant rant on Dahua and “human rights” issues like the Uyghur and other “woke” politics turned me off, so I closed my membership.

I understand a large portion of their audience are pro installers and integrators but Im not going to pay 3x for Axis for an equal or less than equal product in many cases, I can’t pass that cost off to an uneducated customer.
 
Last edited:
  • Like
  • Wow
Reactions: JDreaming, Oceanslider, Flintstone61 and 6 others
HD, Lowes and Bestbuy are the only retailers that are going woke? How many units per year do they sell combined in comparison to say like Amazon? Or B&H or other retailers? Hell, Ring sales tripled last year, even though they had terrible reports of crappy security for a throw away item. Todays big ticket item purchasers don't get too deeply buried in global social issues when it comes to consumerism and what they think they must have. They saw something advertised on teevee using people with pasted on pearly white smiles, living the good life in the burbs with their kids in the back yard playing with fido and having a picnic on their postage stamp size lawn and 3/4 million dollar house. It all boils down to marketing to the proposed audience. Marketing to the right group makes that group want to pick up their smart phone and order $1500.00 in video equipment, because they have a image in the back of their minds that all this equipment will help protect them and their American Dream from being stolen by the "bad guys". College kids (Gen X and late Millennials) who still are mooching off of mom and dad are the groups mostly who is making all the noise about global social issues. Their monetary voting power doesn't count for much unless it concerns Starbucks, some hip micro brewery or their favorite hipster cafe that is here today and gone tomorrow. The rest of the world pretty much doesn't care.
 
  • Like
Reactions: JDreaming, looney2ns, sebastiantombs and 1 other person
john-ipvm said:
I totally believe you that there are thousand of IPCamTalk users who do this. I also know that there are a lot of people, even installers (trunkslammers) who will gladly bunch holes in firewalls to do it quick and easy. I don't think there is any feasible way to stop those people from using devices designed to work on the Internet by the manufacturer in any way (including port forwarding) to stop them.



Well, Hikvision is, see this Hikvision Argues Airgapping And Firewalling Negate FCC Concerns
Click to expand...
How much of that Hikvision article was taken out of context to write that little story? Camera security is just like gun safety. It all boils down to the end user or the contractor the end user hired to ensure their system is safe and secure. Just ask Alex Baldwin....
 
  • Like
Reactions: JDreaming, looney2ns, fenderman and 2 others
What should I fear? The fear of network spying or bad guys doing whatever? Cops are only minutes away but,
crooks are in and gone seconds?

By the way I gambled on Novell.
So much for PROs
 
  • Like
Reactions: sebastiantombs
john-ipvm said:
No one is asking you to subscribe to IPVM and I regularly make subscriber-only test reports available to IPCamTalk members.
Click to expand...

Still waiting to see a copy of the information here that you noted on the forums without entering a business email address.
 
  • Like
  • Wow
Reactions: TVille, sebastiantombs and user8963
Teken said:
Still waiting to see a copy of the information here that you noted on the forums without entering a business email address.
Click to expand...

No, our team does hundreds of hours of original research that no one else does in video surveillance. We generously provide IPCamTalk members unlocked free access to many tests but I am not obligated to give you a copy of the report.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Mark_M
Teken said:
Still waiting to see a copy of the information here that you noted on the forums without entering a business email address.
Click to expand...
@Teken you need to understand that 80% plus of @john-ipvm 's membership is incapable of setting up a VPN or any other secure method of remote access like zero-tier etc, let alone have the knowledge to prevent the camera from sending outbound data. They know how to run a cable and plug it in. He needs to cater to them. One of the reasons he hits hik and dahua hard is because his paid members have been hit hard by the fact that 1) hik and dahua are cheap and 2) anyone can find pricing online. So trashing hik/dahua makes them feel good. They have trouble charging 500-800 dollars for a camera when the customer can find it online for 100-150. The good old boys club of the old glory days is gone.
 
  • Like
  • Haha
Reactions: JDreaming, Flintstone61, Ssayer and 6 others
@fenderman IPCamTalk literally runs a store selling Dahua and Hikvision products, so accusing IPVM of bias is akin to a man in a glass house throwing stones, that fair?

I think the PRC is a danger to the security of the United States and other liberal democracies and supporting companies like Dahua and Hikvision (with an extensive track record of human rights abuses and unethical activities, e.g., fever cameras) is wrong.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Mark_M and user8963
You must log in or register to reply here.
Top Bottom