to Develop Drone Applications for Smart Home and Business Security

Alarmcom_drone_hovering_Alarmcom-Lab.jpgAt CES 2017, announced plans to develop autonomous, video-enabled drone applications to extend the capabilities of smart home and business security systems.’s multi-sensor awareness and property intelligence, together with the Qualcomm Snapdragon Flight drone platform, will deploy drones to investigate unexpected activity. The drones will be designed to autonomously navigate through the property and provide a high-resolution video feed to the property owner.’s Insights Engine applies machine-learning algorithms to the growing data set generated by devices and sensors in a connected property. By recognizing complex activity patterns and detecting anomalies, can proactively respond to events on behalf of the user, the company reported. intends to leverage these insights to intelligently deploy video-enabled drones to the location where unexpected activity was detected or when an alarm was triggered. Strict, opt-in privacy controls will enable the property owner to easily share the video feed with a central monitoring station and emergency responders.

“This is a very interesting application for drones, which at their core are essentially flying cameras, and by using other advanced capabilities of our Snapdragon processors, is designing a whole new way to provide security to properties,” said Hugo Swart, senior director, product management, Qualcomm Technologies Inc. “The Qualcomm Snapdragon Flight platform pushes the boundaries of the drone industry and has led to many new form factors and use cases, and, with its security expertise, is taking commercial and residential security systems to the next level by integrating intelligent and cutting edge drones to its solutions.”

Daniel Kerzner,’s chief product officer, said, “ has been a pioneer in the smart home and business security space. By analyzing data across the devices on our platform, we have created unique capabilities that make properties safer, smarter and more efficient. We’re excited to use Qualcomm Snapdragon Flight to develop similar applications for drones. Our intelligent drone deployment system will be designed to provide targeted video in response to specific events around a property, augmenting fixed location cameras and enhancing the active security perimeter for homes and businesses.”

Posted in Main | Leave a comment

SimpliSafe DIY Security System Investigation Yields Disturbing Results

DIY home security systems provider SimpliSafe has quickly amassed a large customer base. However, an independent forensic analysis shoots holes in the company’s model, claims and technology.

SimpliSafe — a DIY wireless alarm system that is shipped directly to consumers — ranges in price from $230-$540 depending on the package and equipment.

By Jeff Zwirn · November 1, 2016


Posing as an ordinary consumer, I recently purchased a SimpliSafe package in order to forensically investigate if claims about its products, compared to professional alarm contractors and the products that the alarm industry offers to the public, are accurate.

I also wanted to technically quantify if the representations of SimpliSafe offering an “advanced home security system” were factual.

To that end, I started by reading the SimpliSafe end-user and/or instruction manual. I then set up the system and proceeded to contact the Boston-headquartered company’s technical support department several times to ask about its products and services.

These questions were related to issues either not clarified and/or not disclosed through its website or in the system installation instructions.

What Exactly Is SimpliSafe?

SimpliSafe is a $229.96 and up to $539.95 and more (depending on the package and equipment) DIY wireless alarm system that is shipped to consumers directly.

The system consists of:

  • A base station
  • Keypad
  • Door contacts
  • Motion sensors
  • Glassbreak sensors
  • CO detectors
  • Smoke detectors
  • Water sensors
  • Freeze sensors
  • Wireless siren (in addition to the base station’s built-in siren)
  • Wireless panic button and/or keychain remote

The remote contains the SimpliSafe Easy Setup Wizard, a software program that provides animated instructions and allows system customization. The system uses an onboard cellular transmitter for central station monitoring. Subscribers receive text messages as well as other dispatch and notification services, standardly provided by central stations upon receipt of signals from the subscriber’s premises.

Subscribers do not sign annual or multiyear monitoring contracts, but instead are offered month-to-month monitoring at $14.99 per month.

SimpliSafe wants you to hide your base station with a lampshade.

In just a few years, the company has reportedly sold 200,000 systems … quite a success story. SimpliSafe’s website states that CEO and Chief Engineer Chad Laurans relied on his electrical engineering degree from Yale and an MBA from Harvard to design “an advanced home security system.”

The website goes on to state, “With so many people [meaning the alarm industry] making a profit, they need to use sneaky tactics to extract money from you. Their alarms use old wired technology and they’re hard to use (so you need to pay a service engineer for even the most straightforward task). SimpliSafe has sliced out shady annual contracts, intrusive installations and costly middlemen. We designed our system from scratch to give you everything you need in a security system plus some exciting bells and whistles.”

These audacious statements have drawn the ire of those within the security industry. And while that is enough for serious consternation, what is even more alarming, based on my findings, is that SimpliSafe has been concealing key information from the public with regard to its claims, assertions, systems and service.

Indeed, after inspecting the SimpliSafe equipment components, I identified what I believe are a profusion of irregularities.

The Complete System Is Not NRTL Listed

Let’s first look at the functional brains of the system: the base station.

While the wireless smoke detector and wireless carbon monoxide (CO) detectors are listed and labeled by Intertek, a Nationally Recognized Testing Laboratory (NRTL), and are in accordance with applicable statutory requirements of the National Electrical Code, NFPA 70 and UL standards, none of the other SimpliSafe devices are NRTL listed.

That includes, most importantly, the base station/control panel, which is required to be listed by an NRTL. The system manual references UL 985 and NFPA 72, but the fact that the base station is not listed is astonishingly absent from SimpliSafe’s website and marketing materials.

This means that only some of the system’s components are NRTL listed to UL Standards.

The purpose of independent third-party testing like this is to independently verify safety and reliability of the product to show that it meets universally adopted standards and codes.

Jeffrey Zwrin posed as an ordinary consumer to investigate SimpliSafe's products

Forensic alarm and security expert Jeff Zwirn puts a SimpliSafe system through its paces.

Such testing is required by NFPA 70 for the security and life-safety portions of the system when utilized, and is accepted as a nationally recognized industry standard and best practice.

The system’s base station is packaged together within an approximately 10.5-inch-high plastic lighted hub around the lower portion of its cone-type housing. Components in the system include:

  • Logic boards
  • A small siren
  • Cellular wireless radio transmitter
  • Wireless receiver
  • AC power input jack
  • Backup rechargeable batteries

Unlike an alarm control panel that is located in a basement or hidden in a closet, the sleek SimpliSafe base station is designed to be visible in the living area. Thus, it is more susceptible to physical destruction by an intruder, which would render the system nonfunctional and useless.

I was told by a SimpliSafe representative that the consumer, being me in this case, should consider placing a lampshade on top of it for a disguise.

At the same time, in response to questions I had for SimpliSafe, I received an email response and admissions stating in part that, while its base station is not UL Listed, it is tested (by the company itself) to meet UL standards. Importantly, there is no mention of the product meeting the compliance requirements, testing and successful listing mandates of UL 1023 and UL 985.

SimpliSafe does not use best practices

Therefore the information in the email is false. That is not the equivalent of the proper UL Listing. All of the system’s wireless keypads, sirens, key fobs, door and window transmitters, motion detectors and audio glass-break detectors are also not UL Listed or listed by any NRTL. There are also no tamper switches on any of the wireless transmitters.

So, if an intruder forcibly broke a glass window that only contained a contact, he could simply remove the cover of the transmitter to gain access to its internal battery. The SimpliSafe system would fail instantly.

This SimpliSafe design and equipment does not at all compare to what the professional alarm industry uses, is not “advanced,” and does not comport with nationally recognized industry standards and best practices.


Customer Service Reps Don’t Help


Continuing on with my investigative interview, I asked more questions of SimpliSafe’s support department representatives and the answers were remarkable.


The system manual curiously references UL 985, which is the UL standard for Household Fire Warning System Units. According to technical support representatives I spoke with, UL 985 means the transformer is to be secured to the wall with a bracket, which the company will send you for free if required.


Importantly, that is all the SimpliSafe tech support reps believe UL 985 requires to be provided, to the extent the local jurisdiction has the same requirement.


Not only was the information provided grossly inaccurate, but the plug-in portion of the system’s transformer that connects to the base station is not equipped to provide for restraining means, so it can easily be unplugged, accidentally or otherwise. Stated differently, the wireless smoke and CO detectors that SimpliSafe provides to consumers are listed, but the base station that receives the signal, activates an alarm and notifies the remote supervising station is not.


Therefore, SimpliSafe products are not in compliance with nationally recognized industry standards and best practices. They do not even meet Radio Shack control panel standards of the past as even this equipment was UL Listed.


Ineffective Sirens and Alarms


Moreover, I was advised by the SimpliSafe customer service rep that if a burglar alarm, panic alarm, smoke detector or CO detector activates, the system’s siren does not have the technical capability to distinctly sound such that the consumer could discriminate among the sources of impending danger.


This critical feature is required by NFPA 72 of The National Fire Alarm and Signaling Code. It was required in the National Fire Alarm Code as well, for fire alarm and CO detector equipment, through the use of Temporal 3 and Temporal 4 sounding.


SimpliSafe is extremely prone to hacking. It also doesn't help that the home station is in plain sight for intruders


Instead, the SimpliSafe consumer does not know what caused the alarm and must go to the keypad to retrieve that information, or await a text message, wasting critical time before knowing the nature of danger detected by the system. The latter assumes their cellphone is on and/or that it has functional wireless connectivity.


The wireless SimpliSafe siren is not properly supervised and not listed, plus the system’s base station and the central station do not receive any trouble signal if the unit fails. Only a local beep sounds during certain times when its batteries get low. This configuration alone does not meet the mandates and requirements set forth in NFPA 72 or applicable UL standards, and does not meet nationally recognized industry standards and best practices.


Also, the siren is not listed by an NRTL. Without proper supervision and reliable audibility, the occupants of the home will not be promptly alerted and warned of a life-safety emergency.


Additionally, consumers are not likely to recognize the importance of having sounders that are loud enough and in the right locations in order to alert and warn them of an emergency.


There is no warning in the SimpliSafe manual to instruct the end user about how important audibility is on all life-safety systems. It should also be noted that the base station has an onboard siren measuring approximately 2.25 inches in diameter integrated into its bottom.


SimpliSafe represents the siren produces 85dBs of sound. However, since the siren is facing downward, and is partially enclosed in the base station, I found it to be muffled during activations. The wireless, non-supervised siren is represented by SimpliSafe to be 105dB.


Simplisafe uses an outside monitoring agency, just like the alarm companies it bashes


Company personnel advised me it can be installed outdoors, even though it has no tamper switches and is not listed or recognized to be placed in an outside environment, or even designed to any standard to be exposed to the elements.


So if the SimpliSafe system activates due to detection of a life-safety emergency from a wireless smoke or CO detector in the basement of the home (with the base station of the system on the first floor), anyone sleeping on the second floor would have difficulty being alerted in accordance with NFPA 72 audibility requirements. They, in part, require the fire alarm sounder to be 15dBs over the ambient noise level at pillow.


The company rep I spoke with said NFPA 72 has nothing to say about sirens. Even though the system’s manual references NFPA 72, when I asked the tech support rep if he had a copy of it, I was told SimpliSafe is a paperless company and that I should Google it.


The System Relies on Pro Monitoring


The in-house rep also told me that SimpliSafe’s components are better because they are wireless. However, they do not have encrypted wireless technology available.


I was also told its wireless smoke and CO detectors cover 300 square feet. Typically, smoke detectors sold by the professional alarm industry protect an area of up to 900 square feet. And CO detectors, which are time-based to only detect high levels of CO starting at 70 ppm, take 60-240 minutes sustained at the detector before an alarm activation will occur under UL 2034.


The company rep reiterated the marketing claim that SimpliSafe is the better alternative to professional alarm systems since you cannot cut any wiring. But the cutting of any protective loop wiring on a normally closed burglary alarm circuit triggers the alarm system; it does not impair it.


The SimpliSafe base station has a blue light on it, making it easy to spot for intruders.

The SimpliSafe base station has a blue light on it, making it easy to spot for intruders.


The base station, which has a blue light on it, is recommended to be mounted near a window. So the unit would be vulnerable to an intruder to render it nonfunctional.


It should be noted that when the system goes into alarm its blue light turns off, supposedly making it difficult for an intruder to find it. But the sound of the system’s onboard siren still comes from its base station, which in my opinion makes it easily identifiable with or without the light.


Plus, all an intruder would need to do to know how the system works (and can be defeated) is to note SimpliSafe’s decals or yard signs, and then reference its website.


With regard to system monitoring, SimpliSafe uses a nationally known subcontract UL-Listed Five Diamond CSAA Central Monitoring Station whose primary target audience is professional alarm dealers. That’s interesting since SimpliSafe’s broad marketing brushstroke, with its powerful Internet and social media campaigns, is intent on damaging the reputation of professional alarm companies while the company uses the same type of monitoring services itself.


In the SimpliSafe manual, it states the system should be tested by a “qualified” technician every three years, which came from earlier editions of NFPA 72. However, the 2010 edition of NFPA, per Table 14.3.1, requires annual testing. I asked the rep who that would be, meaning who would the consumer call? Would I have to call an alarm company to perform this test?


SimpliSafe products are not in compliance with nationally recognized industry standards and best practices … they do not even meet Radio Shack control panel standards of the past.


I was advised by the rep that the local fire marshal would do this task. However, NFPA 72 defines what a qualified technician is and fire marshals generally do not have the core qualifications, let alone perform this service for consumers or have the time to do so.


On another call to SimpliSafe support, I was told a handyman or a “certified” handyman (certified in what, I thought) could perform the task. If unqualified persons test life-safety systems, as recommended by SimpliSafe, the results may be unreliable and potentially catastrophic to persons relying on these systems during an emergency.


Lastly, a rep stated the company could test the system over the phone with the customer, which again is not the intent of this NFPA 72 requirement.


SimpliSafe also states that its base station contains eight hours of standby time if the primary AC transformer power fails to the system. However, for systems equipped with life-safety detectors, NFPA 72 mandates and requires 24 hours of standby time when primary power fails to a control panel set, in addition to four minutes of alarm time.


How can any company refer its customers to NFPA 72 in its installation manual yet not be familiar with NFPA 72 or design its products to be in compliance with it?


Monitoring Is Nontransferable


Focusing on training, the rep told me they get their training directly from SimpliSafe in-house, and that the company’s president cares about his employees and customers. SimpliSafe touts you can sign up on a month-to-month contract and not be locked in to a long-term monitoring contract by the alarm industry. When I asked if I can cancel its monitoring and contract with another central station, I was given a flat-out no, and the news that I would be left with a local alarm system only.


Therefore, by design, SimpliSafe sells its monitored product and if you cancel, the system cannot be monitored by any other central station (ever).


SimpliSafe should disclose this to consumers, as it is clearly relevant. At least with so-called long-term monitoring contracts, most alarm companies will allow the customer to contract with another central station at the conclusion of the monitoring contract.


Coming full circle, in no way should SimpliSafe’s system be considered as providing advanced or comprehensive security. In my opinion, the company’s actions and inactions demonstrate a disregard for its consumers and their families, who rely on SimpliSafe for security and life safety.


SimpliSafe should take responsibility and address the aforementioned serious defects and irregularities, many of which the average consumer would not be aware of yet incur the potential negative outcomes as a consequence.


The business of security is a serious one, and no one should ever be sold a product that provides a false sense of security or does not fully comply with nationally recognized industry standards and best practices.




Posted in Main | Leave a comment

AlarmForce Admits to Wrongfully Charging Monitoring Fees After Subscription Cancellations

AlarmForce said its policy review resulted from due diligence undertaken during a potential sale process.

By Rodney Bosch · August 24, 2016

Retroactive to Aug. 1, 2013, residential customers who have been incorrectly charged monitoring fees subsequent to the cancellation date will receive a refund of those charges, plus interest, the company announced in a news release. AlarmForce said it is considering its cancellation and other practices relating to existing residential customer contracts in all jurisdictions.

The company said its review, in part, resulted from due diligence undertaken during a potential sale process. During the course of the review, the company’s cancellation practice was raised as an issue. With the assistance of outside advisors, AlarmForce determined that immediate action was required to change the practice to resolve the issue.

AlarmForce also announced that as a result of this change in practice, it is undertaking a detailed examination of its revenue recognition policies for the periods starting fiscal Q4 2013 for revenue generated from customer contracts after a customer had requested cancellation of services. Where legislation governing consumer agreements prohibit charges made after cancellation notices, the company’s preliminary conclusion is that the cancelled subscription revenue should not have been recognized.

AlarmForce said it may need to restate reported revenue for some or all such previously reported financial results in relation to charges previously recognized from cancelled customer agreements where the company’s practice did not comply with such legislation.

Due to the scope and work involved in this review, the company does not expect it will have completed the necessary work to assess any required restatement and for the reporting of its quarterly financial results by Sept. 14. The company said it will provide timely updates as to the expected date of reporting of its financial results.

AlarmForce said it has been reassessed by tax authorities for the State of Florida in relation to the company’s classification of installers as independent contractors. The Florida tax authorities have taken the position that the company’s contract installers should have been classified as employees.

The company is currently subject to two upcoming audits —  an IRS Employment Tax Examination for 2014, and an audit under the Employer Health Tax Act in Ontario, Canada, commencing in September. Consequently, the company is considering possible employee tax liabilities in connection with the classification of its independent contractors and is currently evaluating the impact of whether this possible liability affects Q3 2016 or prior periods.

The company said it is considering how it will address classification of installers. A decision to convert installation personnel into employees will increase operating costs.


Posted in Main | Leave a comment

Smart Electrical Socket Could Be Exploited to Hack Email

A vulnerability in a popular brand of smart electrical sockets has been found that could allow hackers to spread malicious software to connected devices.

Researchers have discovered that attackers could take advantage of a feature that allows the undisclosed smart electrical socket to send emails to the user every time it switches on and off.

By Rodney Bosch · August 19, 2016

BUCHAREST, Romania— A smart electrical socket that could allow a hacker to turn power outlets into botnets, read your email, and even set your house on fire if you connect an appliance that could overheat? Those nightmarish scenarios are all possible, according to security researchers.

Researchers at cybersecurity software firm Bitdefender, based here, have identified a vulnerability in an undisclosed popular brand of smart electrical socket they say could be hijacked by an attacker,

The vulnerable socket plugs into a regular one, and allows users to schedule the activity of any dumb electronic device, with the help of a smartphone. The app is available for both iOS and Android platforms, and there have been over 10,000 downloads from Google Play alone, according to the article. Bitdefender contacted the smart socket vendor, which has said they will release a fix during Q3 2016.

Among the most destructive actions someone could perform is to wipe the existing software on the socket and to replace it with malicious one, researchers said.

“Up until now most IoT vulnerabilities could be exploited only in the proximity of the smart home they were serving, however, this flaw allows hackers to control devices over the Internet,” Alexandru Balan, chief security researcher at Bitdefender, told Motherboard. “This is a serious vulnerability, we could see botnets made up of these power outlets.”

Researchers who analyzed the power outlet have found several security issues, including a weak username and password combination that users are not alerted to change. Experts have also noticed that, during configuration, the app sends WiFi credentials in clear text over the network.

In addition, when the device communicates with the app, the information passes through the vendor’s servers unencrypted. It’s only encoded, a process that’s easily reverse engineered.

Researchers have also discovered that attackers could take advantage of a feature that allows the device to send emails to the user every time it switches on and off.

Bitdefender outlines two possible attacks, which the company tested in an environment similar to the common home. The article continues:

They say hackers can compromise the email account of the user, if two-factor authentication is disabled. Attackers have to know the MAC address of the device and the default password. With that, they can reschedule the smart socket, or access all the information the device come into contact with, including email credentials.

Another hack that can be performed requires a little bit of coding. When typing a password, the “;” symbol can be misinterpreted as the end of a command. Someone might use this to their advantage, and instead of typing a password, they might type instructions for the device to perform a malicious action. Usernames and passwords should be stripped of characters such as commas or semicolons, in order to prevent command injections.

“When an attacker exploits this flaw, the commands specified in the new password overwrite the root password and can open the embedded Telnet service. Using Telnet, an attacker, regardless of his location, can send commands to stop/start/schedule the device, as well as to execute rogue commands, including running malicious firmware to achieve persistence or using the device to perform attacks on other computers or devices inside the local network,” Bitdefender said in a paper.

The consequences for users can can extend to losing control of all their network-connected devices as they become weapons of attack in a cyber-criminal network, as well as to exposing their email accounts and their contents, security researcher George Cabau told Motherboard.


Posted in Main | Leave a comment

DIY Systems Provider Goes Too Far in Ad Attacking Electronic Security Industry

Boston-based SimpliSafe attacked the home security industry, painting alarm companies as enemies looking to take advantage of customers.

SimpliSafe is a hybrid residential and small business security systems provider that sells DIY kits.

By Scott Goldfine · August 4, 2016


I’m mad as hell and I’m not going to take it anymore!

That’s how I feel after coming across an inflammatory ad seeking to discredit the entire security alarm industry.

The offending company first drew my attention last year with testimonial-oriented TV ads highlighting its offering was different from traditional alarm systems. The ante (and my pulse) was raised when I began to hear radio and podcast ads more openly critical of the “traditional” alarm industry.

However, the recent print magazine campaign I encountered is, in my opinion, an all-out declaration of war on our industry and as such has my blood boiling.

The egregious and antagonistic act was inflicted by SimpliSafe, a Boston-headquartered hybrid residential and small business security systems provider that sells prepackaged self-installed (DIY) kits online, with alarm monitoring principally handled by Roselle, N.J.-based AMCEST’s wholesale central station ($14.99/month to customers).

Having grown to more than 250 employees and a claimed 500,000+ customers, SimpliSafe’s aggressive marketing has been fueled by funding from investors such as Sequoia Capital’s $57 million infusion in 2014. Founded by Ivy League graduate and current CEO Chad Laurans, the company presently offers some 10 wireless home and light commercial packages priced from the $229.96 “Starter” set to the $539.85 “Ultimate” option.

RelatedSimpliSafe DIY Home Security System ‘Inherently Insecure’ and Prone to Hacking, Report Finds


The giant incendiary headline reads: “There is something TERRIBLY WRONG with the Home Security Industry.”

The body copy includes these assertions: “Most alarm companies take advantage of people who want to feel safe. They offer you a ‘free’ outdated alarm, but then require you to sign a long-term contract full of nasty fine print. It’s pretty sickening really. Our founder, a Harvard engineer, studied the alarm industry and found all kinds of problems with it.”

During my nearly two decades in this business, I have seen many newcomers to the electronic security field deploying all kinds of strategies and making lots of claims. But never have I witnessed — particularly on such a large, nationwide scale — the brazen bashing and venom spewing now being aimed at our great, proud and proven industry by this bile-pedaling excuse for a security company.

It’s more than hitting below the belt; it is an affront to everything for which we stand. Further, it undermines the well-deserved and hard-earned faith and trust we have instilled among the public.

It’s bad enough our industry has had to contend with losing customers to deceptive sales practices and get bombarded with rampant news reports of consumers being victimized by alarm company scams. We all know, and to their credit some of our trade associations’ high-profile companies have stepped forward to publicize the fact that those cases are a few bad apples and low-end bottom feeders that are not truly representative of the industry overall (media sensationalism also plays a role).

It’s more than hitting below the belt; it is an affront to everything for which we stand. Further, it undermines the well-deserved and hard-earned faith and trust we have instilled among the public.

The closest parallel I can draw to SimpliSafe’s negative campaign is the alarm industry’s conflict with law enforcement regarding false alarms, and the few highly vocal detractors who pushed for nonresponse and excessive penalties. Thanks to better equipment and practices, along with vigilance from organizations like the Security Industry Alarm Coalition (SIAC), false alarms have been reduced and relationships with first responders much improved. However, we had all better brace for a false alarms surge in the near future due to self-installed devices such as those sold by SimpliSafe.

No matter what anyone alleges, there is no substitute for a custom-tailored, professionally installed security system.

That issue is among several — not the least of which are misleading declarations and reports of system hacking vulnerabilities (sources tell me there have also been licensing snafus) — that tell me SimpliSafe ought not be throwing stones from its glass house. An outfit like that can’t touch the high skill and expertise, superior equipment, wider choice of products and services, and premium customer service, full-service operators in our business deliver on a daily basis.

DIY has its place in the market but there is no room for desperate, baseless ploys that soil the good name of our industry and its thousands of upstanding professionals.

However, just doing a good job is not enough. From grassroots to mass media, security firms and groups must actively promote the industry’s virtues and help ensure the public is exposed to balanced and truthful information.

Posted in Main | Leave a comment

Smart Home Market to Exceed $60B by 2021, Forecast Suggests

North America dominated the market in 2015. More awareness of energy savings as a result of smart home technology is one of the factors for the anticipated growth.

By SSI Staff · June 29, 2016

The global smart home market is expected to surpass $60 billion by 2021, according to a forecast by Research and Markets.

Increasing awareness of energy saving among customers, surging demand for real-time home security and growing technological advancements are anticipated to boost the global smart home market during the forecast period. In addition, backed by the expanding Internet of Things (IoT) market, booming M2M communication market and thriving touch-free intuitive gesture control market, the market is expected to register a healthy growth rate over the next five years.

North America dominated the smart home market in 2015, followed by Europe, Asia-Pacific, Middle East & Africa, and South America

“A smart home refers to a residence equipped with computing and information technology devices, which anticipates and responds to the needs of the owner in an efficient and effective manner. In a smart home, the owner can easily monitor and control a wide range of applications such as lighting control, access control, fire detection, leak detection, energy efficiency, etc. from anywhere via his/her smartphones or internet. Smart homes also use key cards or fingerprint identification in place of conventional locks, making it harder for someone to break-in.”


Posted in Main | Leave a comment



The Wi-Fi Doorbell Camera is a doorbell with an integrated camera, PIR motion sensor, digital microphone and speaker, enabling homeowners to answer the door, speak to visitors via two-way audio, record doorbell triggered clips, and set motion triggered automation rules – all right from their app.

Call today for special pricing. 1-866-641-6599

Posted in Main | Leave a comment

Washington, D.C. Offering Rebates Up to $750 for Installing, Registering Surveillance Cameras

Businesses and residents can register their security cameras through paperwork and receive a rebate check in the mail weeks later.

One D.C. resident called the rebate program “a great idea.

WASHINGTON, D.C. — Residents and business owners here have been given quite an incentive to purchase video surveillance cameras. A new program in Washington, D.C. will provide rebates to home and business owners to help them purchase the cameras in exchange for registering the cameras with the District.

Residents can earn rebates up to $500 and businesses up to $750, according to an NBC Washington report.

“It’s almost impossible to commit a crime these days and not be caught on somebody’s video,” says Police Chief Cathy Lanier.

Feedback on the program has been positive, according to the report. All that is required is to fill out paperwork describing the camera that has been installed, D.C. workers come to check out the cameras and then a check arrives in the mail a few weeks later.

Wanda Hawkins, a resident of the nation’s capital, used the program to improve security around her home and earned a $500 rebate in the process.

“It’s a great idea, a great idea,” Hawkins says. “A couple of my other neighbors are looking into it as well.”

Posted in Main | Leave a comment

ESA, MSCA Respond to Massachusetts Attorney General’s Ruling on Comcast Security Installations

By SSI Staff · December 11, 2015

The Electronic Security Association (ESA) and Massachusetts Systems Contractors Association (MSCA) issued responses to the Massachusetts Attorney General’s ruling on Wednesday ruling that states Comcast does not need a license or permit for its security work.

Both the MSCA and ESA disagree with the ruling.

ESA President Marshall Marinace issued the following statement on Friday: “We are aware of this. ESA is an advocate for licensing. Licensing encourages a high level of professionalism and continuing education for industry owners and employees; licensing protects consumers from unethical and perhaps criminal elements abusing citizens’ trust in gaining access to homes and businesses.

“In addition, provisions in licensing laws often assist the law enforcement and fire prevention community,” Marinace’s statement continues. “ESA supports efforts at the state level to work with state regulators and legislators and other industries to support passage of state licensing legislation to protect the business and professionalism of our industry.

The majority of our members install wireless systems. Many of our members that install similar security systems and technology are also in favor of licensing for many of the reasons above and to elevate the professional standard within our industry.

“ESA is concerned with the precedent that this ruling sets as the majority of our members install wireless systems,” the statement continues. “Many of our members that install similar security systems and technology are also in favor of licensing for many of the reasons above and to elevate the professional standard within our industry.”

The Attorney General’s ruling states Comcast’s Xfinity system “does not constitute a security system” and the company is free to operate without a license or a permit. Back in 2012, a cease and desist order was issued to Comcast in Andover, Mass.,  and Amesbury after the Electrical Board ruled in favor of two electrical inspectors. Comcast appealed the lawsuit, and the Attorney General overturned the decision on Wednesday.

The MSCA went as far as to call the ruling “shocking” in a statement released Thursday night.

“While this is the end of the Superior Court Case, it is by no means the end of the issue,” the MSCA said in a press release attributed to president Wells Sampson and legislative chair David Wescott.

Posted in Main | Leave a comment

Door-to-Door Alarm Salesman Arrested for Intruding Into La. Home


A Fluent Home salesperson allegedly forced his way into a Louisiana home in an effort to sell a burglar a

By SSI Staff · May 20, 2015

JEFFERSON PARISH, La. — Police have arrested a Fluent Home salesperson after he allegedly forced himself into a home here while selling burglar alarms.

The homeowner told authorities that Jens Peterson, 20, arrived at her home on May 16 and cracked her door open and let himself inside the residence. Once inside, Peterson put his hands on the resident’s shoulders and began asking about her home security system, New York Daily News reports.

The woman claims that after she pointed her security system out to Peterson, he started pressing its buttons and refused a request for him to leave. The salesman finally left after someone in the living room approached him, according to the arrest report.

When police arrived on the scene, Peterson, along with two other Fluent Home employees, were inside a vehicle parked nearby the home.

The Utah-based Peterson has been charged with unauthorized entry of an inhabited dwelling and peddling with no permit.

Canadian-based Fluent Home is a summer sales model security company with offices in Provo, Utah as well as Edmonton and Vancouver, Canada.

Posted in Main | Leave a comment