It’s been a busy week so far with page design and layout for the April edition of Security Systems News. April is the issue that ships to ISC West coming up at the end of the month. It’s a good looking issue!
Because of the business of the last few days, I have been a little remiss in posting to this blog. I have had some interview material and pics from a March 5 visit I made to G4S’ high-tech video monitoring and data center located in Burlington, Mass. I’ve been meaning to post. The following will highlight that visit.
It was nice to finally meet G4S monitoring and data center VP of ops Jerry Cordasco in person. Jerry has become sort of a go-to guy for me who’s always willing to chat about current trends in the industry. I found out on this visit that he’s also an accomplishedmusician who rocks out pretty regularly.
The center is hard to find… not because it’s actually all that difficult to locate when you have directions, but because when you type “G4S + Burlington, Mass.” into Google Maps, you get the other G4S address in Burlington… the one for G4S Wackenhut, which–while nice and staffed with friendly and helpful people–was not what I was looking for.
Here’s a picture of the placard out front of their building. You’d think I’d of picked up the hint I was in the wrong place when I saw the Wackenhut appended to the G4S name…
Anyway, a phone call to Jerry later and I had sufficient directions to get me to the expansive G4S monitoring and data center campus. Jerry was nice enough to tell me it wasn’t my fault–that the monitoring and data center address isn’t really listed online (keeping a low profile and all that).
The monitoring and data center is nestled on a 450 acre campus complete with miles of hiking/biking trails. And Cordasco assured me they were used by the center’s employees.
While waiting for Jerry to come and get me from the lobby, I had time to admire the the center’s CSAA Five Diamond plaque, and their specially built bike storage room.
“We knew that we wanted to build a video monitoring center–something that was unique, different from what other people had done and different from what G4S had done in the rest of the world, in that G4S has other monitoring centers, but they’re traditional monitoring centers. We wanted to develop something that was more closely aligned with our manned guarding business here in the US, which is Wackenhut.”
I told Jerry I was quite familiar with Wackenhut… at least in Burlington.
“I had the responsibility to figure out how to do that–how to build it, where to build it and what technology to deploy. In the middle of that we acquired a company here in Bedford called Touchcom. We bought Touchcom primarily for its software development capability, which is a product called OneFacility, which is a really interesting software-as-a-service model of a facility management system. They had pretty good market share in New York City in the high rise market and they were starting to spread the application out to other verticals.”
Jerry said G4S was a fan of the SaaS model and of the OneFacility product, specifically and so they bought the company and have been integrating operations ever since. Jerry said he was sent to Mass to scout locations for G4S’ first US-based monitoring center. After a little shopping around, Jerry found the center’s current location and said he couldn’t be happier.
“I found this facility and it’s 30,000 square feet, and it’s in this complex which is a 450 acre complex of all high-tech industries, so it’s really kind of a neat area to be in. There’s all kinds of hiking and biking trails, which is wonderful for our employees. And the landlord’s wonderful. So I negotiated the lease, I went and found an architect and a contractor and we got to work.”
Jerry said one of the big deciding factors was the location’s existing infrastructure.
“The building had been previously occupied by a company called Dictaphone. It had been empty for about a year and a half. But it had certain things in place that were of value to me–it already had a generator, it already had a big UPS. They were in the technology and communications business so they had a lot of infrastructure here that lent itself to what we wanted to do. They already had huge chunks of fiber optic cable coming in. So we gutted the building and rebuilt the interior.”
Jerry said the center was complete and fully staffed and ready for 24/7/365 operation in April of 2009.
Jerry talked a little bit about the center’s back up and disaster recovery as well.
“Our primary network line is fiber optic cable–it’s called DS3 Line–and our backup is wireless. We’ve got a big dish on the roof that’s line of sight to a tower and we have a dedicated antenna on that tower and our own dedicated, licensed frequency from the FCC and that acts as our backup. And then the tower is line of sight to the John Hancock Building. And we’re just completing work on our disaster recover sight which is in Marlborough, Mass.–about 20 or 30 miles from here.”
Jerry took me on a full tour of the facility and I could hear the pride in his voice. “This center is my baby,” Jerry said. “And I don’t like it when people don’t like my baby.” Jerry said the problem with that type of attachment, however, was that his people came to him with everything. “A toilet backs up–go find Jerry,” Jerry said with a laugh. “Bulb burns out–where’s Jerry?” Jerry said he stopped short of scrubbing the scuffs off the walls in the halls with Mr. Clean magic erasers… but only just.
Jerry also talked a lot about ongoing efforts to rebrand the world’s largest security company. When asked if there were any big announcements on the horizon, demurred. “G4S is rebranding itself in many ways. We were Group 4 Securicor, and then there’s G4S and there’s G4S Wackenhut and G4 Technology–over the next year that’s all going to be changing. Everything is going to be G4S. We’ve got a new website up. The individual companies within G4S will no longer have their own identity. They will just be part of G4S. The tagline now is ‘G4S: Secure solutions.’ The idea is to take all of the capability we have within G4S–guarding, technology, investigative services–and apply them to a customer and be able to provide them with a total solution. And that means being able analyze all these component parts. So in the background, we’ll continue to work in this real business intelligence model.”
Those of you going to ISC West can look for Jerry in Vegas. If you stay an extra day, you can even hop on a rented Harley and ride out into the desert as part of SIA’s Ride for Education.
I had to just go ahead post some excerpts from Ken Kirschenbaum’s email newsletter. If you don’t get it, you can sign up at his site and tune in for the occasional back and forth between security industry mainstay Bart Didden and industry insurer Mike Kelly. They’ve been engaged in little friendly sparring match for a while now… Below please find some of their… uh… repartee.
Here’s the initial entry from Mike re: VoIP and liability issues…
Ken:
Your article of Jan 2010 … on IP alarms had brought up a few interesting issues. It is true & agreed alarm monitoring communications over POTS (phone) lines is beyond the control of the monitoring co. However communications over a VoIP Networks for monitoring now has control responsibilities to protected the alarm network from ‘Cyber (virus or Hacking) Breach’ , this exposure is referred to as ‘Frailer to protected your Network’ .
I have built into our Cyber Liability Policy E&O for negligent including gross negligent for ‘Cyber Breach’ that extends to PERS, Alarm, GPS, & Video Monitoring —————-and use of E-mail & Web Sites Network Liabilities is also provided.
My view on the contract provision is to included the words VoIP,, Network, Wireless, Phone lines and all communications , this covers both ‘Analog and IP (Internet Protocol)’ transmissions.
The issue of Insurance coverage for a General Liability E&O policy address ‘Analog’ or POTS Line communications Liability, and the Cyber E&O Liability policy address VoIP /Network Liability is— both policies interface with one alarm contract.
Its is my understanding you are providing a VoIP Disclaimer Notice which is separate from your contrasts , we need to review all the above between us to understand all view points. ATT has confirmed over 42% of the USA has switched from POTS Lines to VoIP Networks. Over the next 5 years 90% will have changed over to VoIP communications.
Best Regards;
Mike Kelly
Security & Communications Insurance
Huh…? (keep reading, it gets better…)
Here’s Ken’s reply to that initial comment.
My Standard Alarm Contracts have been updated to include IP and Internet monitoring, although the Disclaimer Notice still warns subscribers that POTS is the preferred mode of communication. In view of the email article that circulated on February 9, 2010 in which Mark Fischer of Nationwide Digital opined that POTS may soon be obsolete and VOIP the more common mode of communication, cyber liability issues which Mike Kelly has been so concerned about may very well become an important consideration insurance issue.
I spoke to Mike about his E&O program, which he developed. There are a couple of points that he explained. First, his program is underwritten by a carrier that offers the traditional general liability coverage with E&O for the alarm industry, but also includes cyber liability as part of the package. Mike says that for minimum cover the premium is about the same as the other E&O policies in the alarm industry. May as well get the extra coverage.
Now here is what cyber liability involves, if I understand it correctly. First, a cyber attach [hacker would be one] that shuts down the central station computers preventing monitoring. Second, that same virus then attacks the subscriber computer systems that are tied into the central station’s computers through the Internet. Apparently current E&O policies would not cover the alarm company from a claim arising form such an event. Mike’s policy would. And, before I move on, Mike is offering a 5% agency premium discount and Security America Risk Retention Group is offering a 5% premium discount if you use the Kirschenbaum Standard Contracts, so make sure you get that discount.
Mike Kelly compiled a list of examples for cyber liability. Here it is:
Examples of Cyber Liability not Covered an ANY GL Policy:
1) ‘Identity Theft Liability’ CRIME exposures of 1st and 3rd parties over the Internet that “breach” the Network Computers and access Med. info. BIOMETRIC ACCESS ID.,and other Personal data of Employees and Clients, FTC Required Notification Liabilities Is—- Cyber Liability.
2) World Wide Liability of Internet Alarm Monitoring ‘Virus Infection Breach’ that shuts down a Central Station Monitoring—’Frailer to Protect your Network Liability’ Cyber Contingent BI /PD Liability’s is Cyber Liability.
3) IP / Internet Media—Use of E-mail or Web Site Personal Injury Liability , Includes Copyright Infringement, Virus accidental introduction into network, Invasion of Privacy, Liable / Slander / e-Hosting / e-Learning. are Cyber Liability.
4) Network Acts Terrorism Liability, including World Wide Cyber Extortion, Data & Software Replacement, e-Business Interruption/ loss of income/extra expense/ is Cyber Liability.
5) Internet Network Unauthorized Transfer Liability—loss of Funds / Money / Securities is Cyber Liability.
If indeed alarm communication is going to involve and depend upon the Internet cyber liability policies may very well be necessary for proper protection. I’d like to hear more from Mike on this and also from the other alarm insurance brokers who often contribute to this forum.
I may even invite Mike to make a few comments at my first day presentation at the Smith & Wesson Security Dealer seminar on March 24, 2010. For those of you who don’t make it to the bottom of these emails [Mike apparently doesn't get that far], here is where I’ll be at the ISC show in March: I hope to see all of your there. Stop by and say hello.
Okay, I’m with ya. Kinda.
Here’s where it starts to get really interesting with Mike talking about buzz words… VoIP’s really more of an acronym (I’ve been writing about how the industry’s full of em since way back), but…
Ken:
SWICHING FROM POTS LINE TO IP NETWORK—IT CAN BE CONFUSING AND IT’S ALL IN THE TERMINOLOGY;
We all have buzz words to explain what is POTS Lines , Phone Line connection , PSTN (Public switched telephone network), & Analog Communications . This group after talking with a few dealers & Insurance folks looks like these are best called ‘POTS LINES’.
Other buzz words used are VoIP, ‘All Digital’ , IP Platform. IP-VoIP, , Internet, .or Network. This group again after reviewing –looks like these are best called ‘IP NETWORK’.
I would very much like your input and a up or down vote on the terminology , please extend this e-mail to anyone who has any ideas on how we should best express these crossroads of communications.
Thanks;
Mike Kelly
Okay, here’s the fun part, where Bart chimes in…
Hello Michael,
This e-mail request only adds to the mounting confusion and your insistence that there is a cyber liability that has been established upon alarm companies.
My concern is that an insurance professional should not be spearheading an effort that blurs the lines of the terms you are looking to join for the purpose of fulfilling your goal of creating the need for an additional insurance product.
If for no other reason but for clarity of the issue, could you please define for the alarm industry, as you are an insurance professional, what cyber liability is and how it applies to alarm company with some specificity to the way certain protocols are used by the alarm industry, other than your one commonly attached sheet that lists three case decisions to which you offer nothing other than the parties involved, rather than the actual written decisions.
I will admit that the one thing you have been successful at is forcing members of the SARRG Board to talk about this issue and continue to try and figure out it you are correct or just creating a market.
So far it has not been going your way.
Bart Didden
A little inflammatory and adversarial, but you can see his point. And now Mike’s comeback… you can see where “repartee” doesn’t really fit here, but…
Bart—thanks for your response,
As an Insurance Licensed Professional I have produced three (3) alarm Insurance Programs over the past 31 years, we can all agree Insurance products for the alarm Industry can not have blurred confusion and must define the coverage’s and fit the exposures. The reason for my last e-mail was to separate the exposures of communications and bring forward understanding of what is POTS Line (Analog Insurance ) vs. IP (Internet Protocol ) IP Network Insurance.
The IP Cyber Insurance Product is NOT new — the Insurance Market responded to IP Internet liability 8 years ago when the worldwide web network came to be –some say the founder was Al Gore ?. Back then e-mail and web site Liability for ‘IP network’ 3rd party protection ( as today) is not found in a General Liability Policy for– Identity Theft of data, Copyright /Trademark Infringement, Libel, Slander, Personal Injury and False Advertising— and was the base then of the Cyber liability product. I have extended the above coverage’s and included ‘Access Control’ Crime Liability from ID theft of Biometric information (eye retina. fingerprint, voice print & face print) as ID Theft and Crime Liabilities now affect both 1st & 3rd Parties (Clients & Employees) . I have also added Other Coverage’s : loss of funds in unauthorized network transfer , loss of income & extra expense (Including FTC Red Flag notification costs) due to network cyber breach, & cyber extortion to name a few endorsements.
Today—the FBI has confirmed ‘IP Network Identity Theft is the number one Crime’ , but Cyber Liability has moved far beyond what once was just ID Theft. With 45+% of homes and businesses switching from POTS Line to IP Networks The Alarm Industry especially is exposed when Alarm, PERS, Video, Access Control Installation & Monitoring is done over IP Networks . Some of the main exposures are due to the IP Network connected to the worldwide web, a virus or hacker can come from anywhere in the world and inject malicious coding attacking any software and affecting monitoring computers, or (office) network computers shutting them down and or causing data unauthorized downloading. The Insurance policy must have Worldwide Liability Reinsured Treaty Coverage, not just USA Territory– for defense and indemnification. This virus network breach will be viewed as negligence on the part of the alarm dealer known as ‘Failure to protect your Network’ and is a 1st party Liability. As Other Liability exposures come from ‘Rogue Employees’ or ‘Rogue Sub-Contractors’ selling or using your IP network codes to access your networks, and then Acts Of Terrorism comes into the picture both from domestic and foreign parties, to further cause ‘Failure to protect your Network’ Liability.
What is New about Cyber IP Network Insurance coverage’s ( In my professional view) is it has Four (4) main sections of coverage’s. 1) Worldwide Liability to protect 1st & 3rd parties 2) Crime Liability 1st & 3rd Parties, 3) Media Liability e-mail, web site (see above exposures) but also e-Learning & e-networking E&O .4) Network RMR Loss of Income, extra expense, virus / hacking software /computer replacement & loss of funds transferred.
I have enclosed our outline of Cyber coverage’s within the AXIS IP-e Alarm Security Insurance Program for your review and comment. I am open to review with you and the SARRG Board or an Insurance Company– anytime on the Cyber Insurance issues.
Your Input is Appreciated & Very Timely ;
Mike Kelly
I’ll say it again–Huh? I mean, if you’re still reading, you’re a veritable industry blog ninja. Kudos to you.
And this post wouldn’t be complete without Bart’s response…
Michael, you’re welcome.
However, I must admit that I cannot read your last e-mail for it hurts my brain, eyes and skeletal structure in general. I think that I also got whiplash from my head falling to the side so much.
Through your rambling you have perfectly defined why the industry in general should take this issue away from you and devote it to a committee who understands not only our transmission and connected technologies, but the data that we store in connection with the services we provide, which at that point we should invite the esteemed attorneys that you listed to establish the risks that will need to be mitigated, and levels of insurance to protect our assets, besides adopting Standards to also answer how we move forward.
Finally, I am concerned about the distribution list of these e-mails. You have included representatives from companies that have such internal conflicts between the insurance programs you sell and the subrogation departments that look to dismantle the very contract provisions that make insurance affordable for our industry and our services affordable for society.
Please stop, sit back and allow the leaders of our (my) industry do what they do best, protect my interests as an alarm service provider in a cooperative organized manner, rather than an insurance agent just trying to make a market and increase his/hers book of business.
Bart A. Didden
Check out Ken’s site for more… Keep up the discussion, guys.
I actually came across this story a few weeks ago and it promptly got lost in the shuffle of other releases and leads upon which I regularly follow up.
Apparently ADT dispatcher in training David Brown acted quickly, contacted all the appropriate contacts in the protocol hierarchy and managed to save a family’s home, and their dog, Lucy. The dog accidentally turned on a gas burner trying to get at some sweet, sweet cake sitting, nestled between the burners on the stove top. Jeez, I think I’ve done that kind of thing myself of a late evening, trying–half asleep–to cook a snack.
It’s one of those stories that, while it may not be hard news, I really like to see. It’s nice to see a dispatcher doing his or her job, doing it well and being recognized by an appreciative public. Brown confirmed that while most calls are false, a dispatcher or first responder must always assume it’s the real deal and act quickly. Good thing he did.
I especially like the homeowner’s final quote in the story: “‘It is the right thing to do to thank somebody for doing exactly what they are supposed to do and helping save our family, our house and our dog,’ Chris Wardlow said.”
I agree. Just because the dispatcher was only doing his job, that’s no reason not to say nice work, and keep it up for all our sakes.
I was on the phone with Jerry Cordasco, EVP of Ops at G4S‘ Boston-based video monitoring and data center the other day discussing a story I’m working on about video monitoring standards. Shooting the breeze with Jerry got me to wondering what was going on at G4S lately, so I decided to check their site.
Of course, G4S is a mighty big animal (the biggest according to some, though not the biggest according to others…) with somewhere north of 580,000 employees in over 110 countries, so I was looking around their site for a while.
One point of interest I came across was a peripheral site dedicated as a memorial to Jørgen Philip-Sørensen, founder of Group 4 Falck–one of G4S’ parent companies, along with Securicor.
Sørensen was born Sept. 23, 1938 and died of complications from cancer on Jan. 18, 2010. He was 71.
The memorial site also links to a very informative obit from the Times Online (UK) about the life and times of this formative figure in the world of security.
From the article:
Jørgen Philip-Sørensen earned the sobriquet ‘the architect of the modern security industry’ after he built up Group 4 into the world’s largest security firm, with more than half a million staff.
Philip-Sørensen was a larger than life character who, through force of personality, expanded the company from a hilltop base in the Cotswolds into 110 countries. He was not afraid to court controversy, such as when Group 4 became the first private security company in the UK to win contracts for transporting prisoners, a development that was fiercely opposed by those who believed such services should remain in the public sector.
And in his quest for tighter regulation that would make it easier to distinguish between the standards of his well-established operation and those of an industry awash with with cowboy operators and even criminals who set up as security companies in order to commit robbery, he lobbied the British Government hard, and ultimately effectively, for legislation.
This guy was a real pioneer and a hard worker, from the sound of the Times obit. I like the sound of the work ethic and the fearlessness inherent in lines like, “Jørgen, known to his friends as Philip, did not prosper at school and left when he and the headmaster ‘agreed not to waste each other’s time.’ He went to work as a guard for his father’s company in Sweden.” The article also tells how Sørensen was sent to another country by his father to open a new branch of his father’s security guard company.
Unable to speak French or Flemish, Philip-Sørensen got his first break when a factory owner in Brussels agreed to hire his new security company to protect his premises on condition that it would start the service immediately. Philip-Sørensen agreed, even though it was New Year’s Eve.
That night the owner paid a surprise visit and was delighted to find a security officer dressed in a boiler suit shovelling coal into the furnace As the guard turned round he recognised him immediately: it was the salesman who had signed the contract. At this point Philip-Sørensen had only one employee, another salesman. The plan was to recruit and train officers as they won business. As a result he had to sell the service by day and work as a security guard at night until they could earn enough to employ some more staff. Today the Belgian company has more than 5,200 employees.
So I attended the CSAA’s second free webinar. This one was on the social media tools LinkedIn, Facebook, Twitter and wikis. I found it informative and have herein rounded up some commentary, lovely pie charts I made myself, and some other observations. The full write up of the webinar can be found here at SSN.
The first, possibly most interesting thing I noted was that the webinar was completely moderated by, administered by and paneled by security industry women. Rock on women of security!
There were four Quick Polls that section headed each panelist’s presentation. I found the stats interesting.
Here’s the chart for LinkedIn usage:
Pretty much what you’d expect with most people using LinkedIn for professional reasons… No one ever seems to let all their LinkedIn connections know that it’s Monday and they just bought a second cup of coffee.
Facebook results looked like this:
That’s also pretty much what you’d expect: mostly personal usage. Here’s where it’s okay to tell all your friends how much you love coffee or the Muppets Wiki (and I DO love the Muppet Wiki).
When asked if they used Twitter, the voters voted thusly:
Frankly, I was surprised at the number of people not using twitter. I think Twitter moderator Jennifer Bruce’s point about Twitter being an engine to drive traffic back to your company’s site was spot on and hopefully one more security industry professionals will take to heart.
The wiki Quick Poll asked a slightly different question of voters and allowed for more than one response. Here’s the results:
I guess it’s not surprising that most of the voters had used Wikipedia. Heck I think I go there every day.
I also got some feedback from one attendee. Safe Systems Inc. central station manager Ian Nelson said that although he had been familiar with the tools, he hadn’t considered using them in the ways highlighted during the education event. “It was interesting all around, and although the concepts were not new the webinar prompted me to re-examine how I used what I considered professional resources, and made me change my mind on what I used to consider personal resources,” Nelson said. “I did use all of the tools prior to the presentations, but now I am updating more often, and considering professional applications for Facebook, YouTube, and expanding what we do on Twitter. The idea of having demo video links on YouTube had never occurred to me, I considered it a source of entertainment only.”
We’ve been linking YouTube videos for a while in ssnTVnews and find it a valuable resource as well.
Nelson continued:
I found myself expanding my use of current tools; I went into LinkedIn the next day, posted some recommendations, expanded my profile, and invited quite a few people to connect. A resource I used just because I thought I should have a presence became something that I value more–I see more possibilities for interaction and productivity due to the webinar.
Overall, I have contributed more to our social media presence, and this prompted me to push for a corporate LinkedIn presence, so I have to applaud everyone’s efforts and appreciate them greatly.
The latest issue of CSAA’s Signals has some exciting news for those of us who’ve been too budget-constrained to travel to Greece. They’re convening for their annual meeting this year in Marana, Ariz., just outside of beautiful Tucson (of which I’m a big fan–Sabino Canyon is lovely).
From the most recent Signals blast:
2010 CSAA Annual Meeting Returns to U. S.
The Central Station Alarm Association (CSAA) is delighted to announce that the location of the 2010 CSAA Annual Meeting will be the Ritz Carlton Dove Mountain Resort in Marana, Arizona. The meeting will take place Oct. 1-6, 2010.
The Ritz Carlton Dove Mountain Resort is a brand new resort located Northwest of Tucson. CSAA has been able to secure the amazing rate of $239.00 per night for a deluxe mountain room (other room types and suites will be available at higher rates). This is truly a magnificent resort and our dates avoid conflicts with other known industry meetings during October
You will receive additional information soon so that you may plan your time and travel. We believe that you will thoroughly enjoy this new Ritz Carlton and the many opportunities for separate tours and excursions that will be offered.
Please contact John McDonald , CSAA Vice President of Meetings and Conventions at 703-242-4670, Ext. 17 if you have any questions.
Asked to comment on the change in location, Celia Besore, CSAA VP of marketing and programs said part of CSAA’s mission was to serve it’s members. “We want to get the word out, we do listen to our members,” Besore said. “We do make changes … We’ve had such amazing participation when we’ve had the meeting overseas, but with the economy now, and we did have people commenting, so Ed [Bonifas, CSAA president] looked at all the results and made the decision to switch.”
Looking forward to seeing all attendees in Arizona in October.
Got a press release from DGA Security Systems on last week. Seems they’re the latest security company to go through the rigorous qualifying and vetting process to apply for and receive their UL2050 designation. I’ve written about other companies in that select group before. Some other members of the UL 2050 club include Diebold, Acadian, and NMC to name a few.
From the release:
DGA Security Systems, Inc, is pleased to announce that it has been UL 2050 certified, allowing it to install, service and monitor security systems for federal facilities including the U.S. Department of Defense. DGA becomes one of a select number of security companies in the nation to obtain this certification for both the installation and monitoring of systems.
The UL 2050 listing confirms that DGA has met the stringent requirements for the protection of classified materials as certified by Underwriters Laboratories. When evaluating security companies, UL only certifies those that are staffed with highly skilled employees who have gone through extensive training, have appropriate backup procedures in place and follow UL-specific processes.
In a 2009 interview with SSN, UL’s Pete Tallman (who created the 2050 designation) said 2050 spoke to the caliber of the company in question. “It’s a choice [a company makes] so that a service company in, say, Arizona knows they don’t have to verify the knowledge of the company in question … since they have the UL 2050,” Tallman said. “[A company acquires] this listing so they can be readily identified by providers of national industrial security systems as a station that has the skill set to process signals in accordance with with the standard.”
Again from the DGA release:
‘UL has confirmed that DGA can satisfy organizations that require the utmost protection,’ said Stanley Oppenheim, DGA’s founder and president. ‘We maintain a steadfast commitment to provide our customers with superior service, operational excellence and the right security solutions to fit their needs.’
Congrats to DGA and to all those in the process of attaining the designation.
I blogged last year on the great NRTL debate. There was a kind of a showdown brewing between the old standby nationally recognized testing labs UL & FM and the new kid on the block, ETL.
Just got word that another security company has announced that it had passed an Alarm System Certification audit conducted by Intertek ETL. According to the release “the ETL Listing mark signifies Westec has been audited and met or exceeded industry-recognized specifications and rigorous safety standards.”
Well, congrats to Westec for the listing and to ETL for the additional cred. According to the PR person who sent this info along, Westec is one of the first video surveillance companies to go through ETL.
Here’s the press release:
Westec Awarded ETL Listing:
One of the First Video-Based Alarm Services To Make the Mark
DALLAS, TX, February 4, 2010 – Westec Intelligent Surveillance, the nation’s largest remote video monitoring company, announced today that it has passed an Alarm System Certification audit conducted by Intertek, an independent third-party testing lab and certification agency. The ETL Listing mark signifies Westec has been audited and met or exceeded industry-recognized specifications and rigorous safety standards
“Westec is a cooperative, efficient, and compliant burglar alarm central station. In the field evaluation, we noted their employee management processes, training programs, and tracking tools exceeded our expectations, “ said Ron Lemke, Lead Auditor for Intertek. “Westec’s staff had done their homework and any changes or needed contracts could be completed on the spot.”
The ETL certification of Westec Intelligent Surveillance signifies that Westec meets or exceeds industry operational and safety standards according to the following specifications:
UL 681 – Installation and Classification of Burglar and Holdup-Alarm Systems
UL 827 – Central Station Alarm Services
“Receiving the ETL certification is yet another industry indication that our unique video-monitoring system is an excellent security solution which has been thoroughly tested and proven,” said Kelby Hagar, CEO of Westec. “We’re proud the Westec video-monitoring facility, training and video response services were superior to others that had been evaluated.”
I also wrote about Westec last year and their efforts at expansion into the quick-serve restaurant market.
The basic thrust is “We want to work with you and support IP, but need to be sure it reall WORKS…” Which IP doesn’t a lot of the time when you’re dealing with alarm panels. And that’s kind of a big deal when you’re dealing with people’s lives and property.
Here’s the email from ESA in it’s entirety:
ESA and Other Industry Groups File Comments
with FCC on National Broadband Plan
Recently, the Alarm Industry Communications Committee (AICC) – whose membership is comprised of representatives from ESA, the Central Station Alarm Association, the Security Industry Association and several national companies – submitted comments to the Federal Communications Commission in response to AT&T’s recent filing concerning the transition from the circuit-switched network to broadband and IP-based communications.
As part of the American Recovery and Reinvestment Act of 2009, Congress directed the FCC to create a national broadband plan by March 17, 2010 that seeks to ensure that all Americans have access to broadband capability. As part of their plan development, the commission, in December, sought comments on the transition from a circuit-switched network to an all-IP network. The FCC is trying to determine whether or not new policy should be considered and what relevant questions should be raised on how best to monitor and plan for such a transition.
Read the FCC public notice.
On December 21, AT&T filed a comment with the FCC that, among other things, explicitly called for the phasing out of the Public Switched Telephone Network (PSTN). In their filing AT&T states (emphasis added), “Due to technological advances, changes in consumer preference, and market forces, the question is when, not if, POTS service and the PSTN over which it is provided will become obsolete. In the meantime, however, the high costs associated with the maintenance and operation of the legacy network are diverting valuable resources, both public and private, that could be used to expand broadband access and to improve the quality of broadband service. It is for that reason that one of the most important steps the Commission can take to facilitate an orderly transition to an all-broadband communications infrastructure is to eliminate the regulatory requirements that prolong the life of POTS and the PSTN.”
Read AT&T’s comments.
Today, approximately one-third of Americans live in, work in and go to premises where security systems are utilized. Accordingly, many Americans would be impacted if the PSTN is retired before there is a thorough understanding of how it is relied upon everyday in security applications to protect them from harm. Therefore, the AICC in its filing has called on the FCC to consider a plan of orderly transition to broadband and IP-based communications – one that ensures communications services to all Americans will operate with a high degree of reliability and compatibility with existing life safety services and equipment.
Read the comments from AICC.
ESA supports broadband development and IP-based communications. These developments carry great potential in connection with alarm services such as the ability to transmit more data at faster speeds from a protected premise to the monitoring station.
However, the ability of the alarm industry to rely on broadband and IP-based communications will be hindered if all aspects of the communications path are not reliable. Further, ESA and other industry groups support a gradual transition to broadband and IP-based communications to ensure compatibility with existing services and equipment.
As the FCC works on its National Broadband Plan, ESA, through its active involvement in the AICC, will continue to monitor, participate in and report back on the development and impact of the plan.
I checked out some pretty cool vids yesterday. What’s cool about them, as opposed to all the other online vids i regularly check out (I watch this one of my son probably 5 times a day) is that these ones were topical to my beat here at SSN.
That’s right they’re security videos! Now, you’ve all seen Video Killed the Blind PIR from Keith Jentoft at RSI (and if you haven’t I’ve linked it so you can see it again). But there are other companies doing some cool stuff out there as well. NMC’s got some cool videos we’ve had in our ssnTVnews section, and the latest I came across yesterday were from Monitronics.
There’s a series of five homemade vids from the monitoring center that pimp its special, required MoniX dealer training program. I wrote about this new program back in December of 09 and at that time, Monitronics VP marketing Mitch Clarke said the MoniX program was about creating a better industry.
If you remember over the summer, we had the headlines about us suing sales reps. We realized that for us to be a premier dealer program, we realized that we didn’t want any part of that funny business. So we had to say, ‘How do we make our program the premier program?’ We created the Monitronics Experience–MoniX. It’s focus is on how to be a good citizen and how to run a good business.
Here’re the MoniX vids… I like some better than others.
The first one is kinda funny and cryptic.
The second one is, in my humble opinion, the funniest… just seems really true to life.
The third is pretty funny and attempts to capture some of the building tension.
The fourth is cute… As an editor, I know how it feels to find a typo after the media has gone to print!
And the final one is kinda nice, ‘cuz it gets the whole office team in there.
I say keep these inside looks seen through the camera coming. Nice work all.
