Reolink cameras are pretty good for what they are. Just dont buy into their NVR solution...
Frigate also has some interesting applications to go along with it, see: https://github.com/mmcc-xx/WhosAtMyFeeder
I also have YOLO on my to do list for the home cameras.
I put them on separate vlan where they get no outbound network connectivity.
For cases where you want things like facial detection or license plate detection (automatic doors/gates) get a Unifi AI though and those things cost, but for normal perimeter/room monitoring the cheap ones are very good
If they had just stuck with 12VDC and buildings had 12VDC wall sockets everywhere, everything would have been fantastic.
I also had a PoE HAT for a RPi that smoked it. Never doing PoE again. 48V and 3.3V electronics probably don't belong within 10cm of each other.
Blue-line domes, the $240 ones. Four of them. I'd get more but do not know how to make outside routing look neat. i have one bullet and i don't like it and don't use it, i prefer the wide-angle domes with ir.
It fit the price-performance curve for our needs several years ago when we eventually outgrew the previous Netgear POE switch...that was also apparently fanless, and that I installed in 2007.
IIRC, it is a GS724TP. It's running a dozen cameras and some access points, and almost all of the rest of the ports are filled up with computers and printers and other Ethernet stuff. No issues at all to to report so far.
(A used enterprise switch with serious fans may be cheaper and/or more featureful and/or more reliable, but do we need that kind of noise at home? We sure don't need it at that small office.
I've also installed some fanless Cisco POE switches with big heatsinks (and dual power supplies, each fed from different sources) on some high-dollar projects where ultimate reliability was kind of a big deal, but... sheesh.
If one of these installed Netgear switches dies in one of these low-risk environments, I'll just patch things up for now and get a replacement coming under warranty.)
ONVIF is the (now quite old, but still very relevant) standard for interfacing IP cameras locally on a network.
A cheap-but-performant ONVIF camera on an isolated VLAN (or a physically-isolated network; I won't tell anyone) can be a thing of beauty that is also completely unable to call home to some mothership in the clown.
I'm frankly very surprised that I don't see it mentioned here more often when discussions of cameras arise.
Have a look at this thread [1] I have bookmarked. I found it quite informative. I already got some cheap cameras and set them up, but I wish I would have found it earlier. The ones I got are 4MP with 1/3" sensor and perform absolutely terribly in night setting.
[1] https://ipcamtalk.com/threads/getting-cameras-with-the-right...
Huh? We used to have low-voltage AC and DC powered cameras in the world (and we still do, too).
Those are awful in implementation because buildings, whether or old or new, don't have 12VDC sockets everywhere -- or at all, really.
Nor should they have 12VDC sockets for cameras; they're unnecessary.
I've run my share of siamese coax for low-voltage-fed analog cameras, and also separate power for low-voltage Ethernet-connected cameras, and I'm completely over those concepts.
With proper-fucking IEEE POE, we have standards and it only takes one cable to make it work properly instead of more than one.
If a switch isn't up to the power demands of a particular camera, then: No big deal. I can upgrade or supplement that switch without rewiring even more of the building than was already necessary to get Ethernet going.
(Structured cabling for the win.
Passive POE: Not even once.)
No, there aren't, not in the way you imply. There is the IEEE 802 PoE standards, which are all compatible (save for not enough power), and designed to carefully negotiate and especially never break non-PoE devices. And there is bullshit (sorry) like "Passive PoE" that is ironically an active violation of the IEEE specs, can break pretty much anything, and you shouldn't buy so the likes of Ubiquiti and Mikrotik finally get the wallet vote and stop f*cking doing. Unfortunately, the proper PoE PD logic is a few dollars of extra expense.
Yes, there is a slightly higher risk of killing devices due to faults in the PoE supply logic. I have the official PoE HAT for a RPi 4. I have to say it is somewhat poorly designed due to space constraints; the isolation between 48V and 3.3V should be better. I'm not even sure the RPi PoE HAT is spec compliant.
But I don't think you can/should blame this on PoE.
I'm not surprised they can f* up a basic PoE injector. The reason for doing passive PoE is saving a few bucks, on the back of safety and compatibility. Of course they would try to pinch hard on the PoE injector too.
Oh and I'd say they (together with Mikrotik) are responsible for 90% of the bad rep PoE gets. The IEEE 802 stuff really just works. And I say that having been part of rolling out 15000 people conference deployments with several hundred wifi APs in the span of a few days. The only real problem is broken cables, but the Ethernet link commonly fails before PoE is impacted.
Netgear are hard to beat in terms of reliability/price. They also have a 5 and 16 ports fanless version.
I also got an old Juniper EX2200 24ports and replaced the fans with quiet noctua. It run quite hot, better go with Netgear.
Life is a balance between inefficiency and inconvenience. Throwing that statement in without actual numbers is just derailing the conversation.
ONVIF can be used to discover a camera on a network, query it for its RTSP URL, and facilitate a connection between a client service and the RTSP stream. But you can't stream video via "ONVIF".
* https://www.a1securitycameras.com/blog/non-chinese-security-...
Some names: Axis, Avigilon, Bosch, Vivotek, Hanwha Techwin (SK), Acti (TW), Motorola, Mobotix.
And profiles. There are many different feature sets in onvif and just because a camera has onvif logo or compatibility doesn’t mean it will play nice with your gear.
I mean, yes and no. My laptop case is at 78VAC to ground right now. It gives the tingles. I don't use my laptop much while plugged in. They all skimp on making proper 3-pronged chargers these days. My desktop has a grounded case and doesn't have this issue.
My phone, when plugged into wall AC, the touch screen stops working because the whole phone is at an elevated potential and it messes up the capacitive sensing.
Here is one such review: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=HYUY61ZFZAs
Still being sold with 24V passive "PoE"
(It's 802.3af btw)
If the security association isn't completed on a "must-secure" configured port then no traffic is transmitted. One would need access to the pre-shared keys to successfully use the link.
Now, could one perform a side-channel attack of the memory on the camera and get access to them? Maybe.
Then there’s double/sometimes triple conversion (120:48 and then 48:dc; 120:48 and then 48:12, and then 12:dc).
Furthermore magnetics are a must on both side of the PoE which also isn’t great.
At lower power there’s more circuitry to run and multiple conversions aren’t great compared to a simple cheap flyback.
For more technical feel free to check here, although it isn’t quite end to end: https://e2e.ti.com/cfs-file/__key/communityserver-discussion...
I did have issues with some of their other products - eg an old CloudKey gen1 that I had remotely in my parents place that I think ran out of space to the point it can’t update itself and can’t compact some old mongodb.
Sure the switch will only accept encrypted L2 traffic...but that encrypted link is set up via MKA, which is a part of the 802.1X standard. If you don't have 802.1X authenticating the endpoint, you don't have MKA setting up the encrypted link between that endpoint and the switch and you don't have MACsec.
So if you're trying to prevent a bad guy from getting on your LAN, you need 802.1X, whereas MACsec is an optional extra (a very useful extra if you're worried about MITM attacks). But 802.1X is still doing the heavy lifting w.r.t access control.
Cameras are on their own VLAN. Port isolation is enabled so they can't connect to each other. Only connectivity allowed to/from that VLAN is from the cameras to the router for NTP, and from the NVR to the cameras.
So if you plug in you can... check the current time on my router. Maybe see how many other cameras are on that segment? Likely not going to get very far given you're already caught on camera, an alert's been fired, and pretty soon I'm going to be making a call to the police.
In the last 2 years they've released very few new UISP products and you're right that they continue to be passive PoE. I suspect this is for continued compatibility with their older product line. Upgrading from passive PoE to active 802.3 PoE requires replacing the injector and maintaining passive PoE makes it easier to upgrade. And the UISP product line is really meant for wireless ISP operators, not consumers, where the risks of passive PoE are smaller.
Anyway, I agree with the sentiment, but I don't hold it against Ubiquiti too much for continuing to use passive PoE for their UISP line, since I think it makes sense for their customers. As so-so work around you can get a 802.3 -> passive 24V converter: https://store.ui.com/us/en/products/ins-3af-i-g
There are three: IEEE 802.11af, at, and bt.
af can deliver up to 12W at the powered device (PD), at delivers up to 25 W, and bt either 51W (Type 3) or 71W (Type 4):
* https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Power_over_Ethernet#Standard_i...
Any device you purchase should list the IEEE standard it supports and how much power it may draw.
What's your cabling like? Contact Ubiquiti? Looking at the datasheet, I do not see any IEEE standards listed, so they could be doing their own thing:
* https://dl.ubnt.com/datasheets/poe/PoE_Adapters_DS.pdf
You don't mention a specific Aruba AP, but their AP22 stuff lists the needed IEEE standard and wattage:
* https://instant-on.hpe.com/products/access-points/access-poi...
I'm afraid that's not how it works out in actual practice, it's the other way around:
WISP devices are installed in random people's windows, roofs and chimneys. The injector might end up behind their TV set. If their TV doesn't work, they unplug and replug random things. Which will fry whatever has the unlucky pleasure of ending up on the output side of the injector. I'm unfortunately speaking from experience.
Meanwhile, people buying and putting up a wifi AP beyond their CPE wifi router tend to have a bit of understanding. If you told them to never plug anything other than the given device into the output side of an injector, it'd probably go reasonably well.
It's not veering, it's a full on car crash ;)
You run MACsec either with 802.1X, or with your switch vendor's favorite color of proprietary switch-to-switch 802.1X replacement. MACsec without 802.1X [or equivalent] is a bit like TLS without certificates. It exists in a few places because some people have really weird custom requirements (TLS with pre-shared keys… TLS with NULL encryption…) but those things shouldn't drive a discussion outside their special usage areas.
In that sense: MACsec implies and requires 802.1X. Exceptions confirm the rule.
The absolute low-tech solution would be to dedicate a switch for it.
If you have decent infrastructure with a managed switch, you can easily create a VLAN.
Besides the fact that the female RJ45 is usually inside the dwelling. You'd have to unmount the camera, pull out the cables and connect to it, all at typical heights of 6' and above. That's maybe a concern in commercial setups, although then we're circling back to VLAN.