dslreports logo
site
spacer

spacer
 
    All Forums Hot Topics Gallery
spc

spacer




how-to block ads


view:
topics flat nest 
Comments on news posted 2013-01-24 14:46:23: Cox Communications is the latest to jump into the home security and home automation game, following on the heels of similar efforts by AT&T and Comcast. ..

MaynardKrebs
Heave Steve, for the good of the country
Premium
join:2009-06-17
kudos:4

Canadian prices seem to be cheaper - for once

Rogers, in Canada, has been offering this for about a year.
Looks like the same product.

»www.rogers.com/web/content/SHMPkgsandPricing
silbaco
Premium
join:2009-08-03
USA

1 recommendation

Nice...

Not a bad service, but the cost is outrageous.

JeepMatt
C'mon the U
Premium
join:2001-12-28
Wilmington, DE
kudos:3
Reviews:
·Verizon FiOS
·Comcast

Re: Nice...

Cost outrageous? Compared to what?

I've had Comcast's product since summer. It's cheaper than my old ADT service that offered nothing but a number pad - and I now can monitor video, pictures, turn on/off lights, etc - all for $40/month.

From that picture - looks like Cox will use the same Gateway.
--
"ONE team - ONE city - ONE dream!!"

Gone
Premium
join:2011-01-24
Fort Erie, ON
kudos:4

Re: Nice...

said by JeepMatt:

Cost outrageous? Compared to what?

The exact same thing has been offered by Canadian cable companies for a while now and it's quite a bit cheaper. I'm surprised, because it's usually the opposite.

Then again, the home security market up here seems to be a lot more competitive than it is in the US. Constant TV commercials for it on Canadian TV channels, etc.

NotTheMama
What Would Earl Do?

join:2012-12-06

Inaccurate terminology

"Monitoring", yes... "security", no (unless you have a link-up to a security company or police so that they'll be dispatched for "alarms" --especially for that price).

Hmmm, what else could it be used for? ...oh, yeah! letting anyone else tap into the system (snoops, hacking, warrant[less], whatever) ...yum!
--
"...but ya doesn't hasta call me Johnson!"

RogerRR

@rr.com

What?

Who pays for that?
It should be perhaps one time setup fee. Customers already paying for internet used for monitoring.
Nothing else than milking people on the monthly basis.
Joe12345678

join:2003-07-22
Des Plaines, IL

1 recommendation

Will the installers / contractor have better background chee

Will the installers / contractors have better background cheeks?

You don't want this to happen again »consumerist.com/2011/10/05/coupl···eir-son/

Lino

@cox.net

Re: Will the installers / contractor have better background chee

I know that in Louisiana (and several other states) to perform work as a Security Technician you do need to pass a criminal history background check. It is usually through the Office of the State Fire Marshal.

Steve Mehs
Gun Control Is Using A Steady Hand
Premium
join:2005-07-16
kudos:1

iControl

The company behind these security and home management solutions that the cable companies are offering is an outfit called iControl. Time Warner had their ‘Intelligent Home’ service up and running for about a year now, Comcast came aboard about six months prior, Brighthouse starting offering it last Spring and now Cox has it.

»www.icontrol.com/

XANAVirus
Premium
join:2012-03-03
Lavalette, WV
Reviews:
·Callcentric
·Comcast

No deal.

Even if I were a customer of Cox (well, Suddenlink's got the same idea, offering their own service) I wouldn't take them up on this offer.

It's a data grab, that's what this is. I wouldn't let my *ISP* touch my home, at least where automation and security are involved.
Leave home security to the businesses whose entire product is this service.

An ISP should be a pipe to the Internet, not a complete home monitoring system. There's no potential for this, especially given its convenience factor (which is what they're banking on and selling the commercials about).

I have no need or want to remotely control my lights, nor do I need the ability to monitor video remotely either.
Besides, remotely-controlled lights and video feed monitoring do not a security system make.

Think of the exploitation potential!
People taking over the home video feed, watching and recording the times you're at home in order to plan when they break in to steal your stuff or kidnap your kids or you.

People remotely turning off your lights while you're at home. People remotely accessing the video feed to watch all sorts of acts being done in your home, with you as the actor for them as the audience.

Oh sure, maybe Cox (or insert-ISP-here) will secure their system using some sort of proprietary system you can't just access from a web browser -- but knowing people, convenience trumps security, so they'll probably set it up on unsecured HTTP with no authentication or something.

And finally, the grand finale, making a mobile app!

Sure, it'll definitely require a username and password, but most people don't adequately password-protect their phones anyway (figuring they'll always have it with them or if it did get found that someone would be able to use it to reach them on a house phone to give it back).

Who's to say the inevitable mobile app for this service won't just communicate in plain text over insecure HTTP or something, or store the credentials on the phone in a reversible from in plain text somewhere - then the potential attacker-person can just install the app onto their phone and use it whenever to monitor everything that goes on.

And so, for these reasons I wouldn't touch this service with a ten-foot pole (or Suddenlink's, or anybody's).

Plus, why would you want to give even more money to your ISP, for a service you don't need?

cork1958
Cork
Premium
join:2000-02-26

Re: No deal.

said by XANAVirus:

Even if I were a customer of Cox (well, Suddenlink's got the same idea, offering their own service) I wouldn't take them up on this offer.

It's a data grab, that's what this is. I wouldn't let my *ISP* touch my home, at least where automation and security are involved.
Leave home security to the businesses whose entire product is this service.

An ISP should be a pipe to the Internet, not a complete home monitoring system. There's no potential for this, especially given its convenience factor (which is what they're banking on and selling the commercials about).

I have no need or want to remotely control my lights, nor do I need the ability to monitor video remotely either.
Besides, remotely-controlled lights and video feed monitoring do not a security system make.

Think of the exploitation potential!
People taking over the home video feed, watching and recording the times you're at home in order to plan when they break in to steal your stuff or kidnap your kids or you.

People remotely turning off your lights while you're at home. People remotely accessing the video feed to watch all sorts of acts being done in your home, with you as the actor for them as the audience.

Oh sure, maybe Cox (or insert-ISP-here) will secure their system using some sort of proprietary system you can't just access from a web browser -- but knowing people, convenience trumps security, so they'll probably set it up on unsecured HTTP with no authentication or something.

And finally, the grand finale, making a mobile app!

Sure, it'll definitely require a username and password, but most people don't adequately password-protect their phones anyway (figuring they'll always have it with them or if it did get found that someone would be able to use it to reach them on a house phone to give it back).

Who's to say the inevitable mobile app for this service won't just communicate in plain text over insecure HTTP or something, or store the credentials on the phone in a reversible from in plain text somewhere - then the potential attacker-person can just install the app onto their phone and use it whenever to monitor everything that goes on.

And so, for these reasons I wouldn't touch this service with a ten-foot pole (or Suddenlink's, or anybody's).

Plus, why would you want to give even more money to your ISP, for a service you don't need?

I am probably one of the very few that will agree with you here!!

Can't believe you even thought about the "inevitable" happening!! Who thinks about that stuff? Let's just live for the moment!!

Don't know if Charter has this (or thinking about it) but if they do, I SURE AS HECK WOULD NOT let them monitor anything of mine! Yeah, they are my ISP and are monitoring some of my stuff, I'm sure, but that one can't be helped if I want HSI.
--
The Firefox alternative.
»www.mozilla.org/projects/seamonkey/

stevek1949
We're not in Kansas anymore
Premium
join:2002-11-13
Virginia Beach, VA

Posted two days ago

»[VA] Cox offers home security service in Hampton Roads

Kara

@comcast.net

outages and no security duh

Most people don't get it when cable outage on the node and internet or phone don't work and long power outages too. Battery backup only goes so far and cable outage it not going work anyway. Same as AT&T Uverse look at the past week....