Given the ever-increasing number of camcorders
It so happened that for three and a half years I worked in a small office selling, installing and servicing security and video surveillance systems.
I would like to somehow share my experience in this topic, especially after reading such comments .
Of course, the degree of insanity in this type of panic statements
In any, and even IT work, everything depends on the human factor, that is, at the end of the chain of finding out what the video surveillance system recorded, there is a security officer or the Ministry of Internal Affairs and a specialist responsible for the video surveillance system. That is, there is a high probability that video will not be obtained quickly or immediately.
It is necessary:
Reaching the installation site is not always easy. There are difficult economic relations at the facilities, and even when recording equipment is right outside the door, it is unlikely that they will open it, even if there are crusts, as the owner of the equipment or the owner of the keys must also be found.
')
Negotiating with the person in charge should be done quickly, as usually small enterprises do not keep video recording for more than two weeks, and archives are overwritten cyclically.
Making a video is also a problem. Basically, the problem in understanding this mechanism is the man in the street. This is only in TV shows, you can connect to the camera through the floor of the country and watch the live video. This can be done only in very large companies at the level of cellular operators or banks. On most objects, video recorders are autonomous. And, although the new equipment has the ability to broadcast to the network, not every installer and integrator gives the equipment this opportunity.
The problem is just that connecting a specific device to the internal network of the enterprise and dragging through the network gigabytes of video traffic every day from each remote object from the security guards will not have enough hands or channel thickness, especially considering that this channel can not to be, and the construction of infrastructure in some places is economically unprofitable. The maximum for whom you can count in this situation is the employee who will go and save everything you need manually.
The owners of small private offices and even stores of large chains in the coffin saw someone provide access to their registrars through the network, and even connect recorders to the internal network of the enterprise. They hold video surveillance in order to monitor their employees and record internal minor incidents such as breaking shop windows or petty theft. And even, considering that the default passwords, practically none of the owners of these systems change, it is often impossible to connect from the outside to the recording equipment because of the lack of physical access to it, or constant control by the staff of access to the equipment.
Sometimes at large sites such as factories, the guard watches in real time images from cameras, but this is the exception rather than the rule. You need to understand that the video surveillance operator has to pay for staring at the screen, and only large enterprises can afford it. In the overwhelming majority of cases, in real time, no one follows the cameras, because this is a dog's work.
In fact, videotapes are searched in the video archive by the date and time of the incident. A real observation can be seen unless the transfer through the fence,or the fall of the aircraft on a large pentagonal building.
It is difficult to determine the identity of a person in a video from conventional video surveillance systems. If this person was initially not familiar to the guard and the security officer, did not become familiar at the facility, then only the special services can determine the person by video. I did not see any commercial search systems for the portrait.
In addition, to get a good portrait in most cases with the cameras is impossible. The typical resolution of most surveillance cameras does not exceed 700 TV lines, cameras are installed at a height of more than two and a half meters and cover large spaces. Almost no one puts on the camera long-focus (with a small angle of coverage) lenses aimed at the doorway. The lenses and protective glasses of the covers are often dirty, and this greatly affects the quality of the picture. Well, if the chambers are cleaned once a year, they often collect dust during the entire service life. The owners do not like to spend money on system maintenance. In addition, video is rarely recorded at a frequency of 24 frames per second, usually 6 or less. Therefore, the portraits on the videos are blurry.
Separately, I will talk about IP video surveillance. Yes, this is the least protected from unauthorized access system, again, there is a constant access to the network, default passwords, backdoors and jambs of firmware, allowing access to Linux on board the camera, all this is present. Yes, the picture quality from such cameras is significantly higher than from analog ones. Sometimes the quality is amazing. But the human factor plays a role here too: disk space for video from IP cameras is much more necessary, which is not always taken into account. The cost of the cameras themselves is at least ten times higher than that of analog ones. Contractors do not have enough qualified specialists to work with this equipment, and IT specialists at the site do not help contractors in principle. Good cameras are expensive, very expensive, our branded (aka Taiwanese / Chinese) suffer from childhood diseases - there are no pre-sale combat testing from manufacturers for which the cameras sometimes do not survive the warranty period. Optics (lenses) often do not match the resolution and quality of multi-megapixel arrays, which is why some models of IP cameras do not have much better picture quality than analog cameras.
Examples:
From all this, I personally suggest the conclusion: with the existing system of video surveillance integration (more precisely, the absence of this system), with a low equipment service culture, with the low professionalism of the vast majority of people employed in this industry (here you have to be not just a safe person, not just an electronic engineer with knowledge of optics, not just an IT specialist, and not even an office with such specialists, you need to be this all in one person, and still not be lazy to climb the pillars to the cameras), with laziness and a small number of operational workers and places
paranoia about instant identification by recording from surveillance cameras has the right to be only for those who work in buildings with surveillance on offices and corridors, for those who can be purposefully monitored, or for those who are doing something inappropriate under observation if someone else knows about it.
I would like to somehow share my experience in this topic, especially after reading such comments .
Of course, the degree of insanity in this type of panic statements
Considering the ever-growing number of video cameras that shoot everything and everyone, it’s like sending your own photos or photos of cars with numbers to the special services themselves.It seems to me elevated.
In any, and even IT work, everything depends on the human factor, that is, at the end of the chain of finding out what the video surveillance system recorded, there is a security officer or the Ministry of Internal Affairs and a specialist responsible for the video surveillance system. That is, there is a high probability that video will not be obtained quickly or immediately.
It is necessary:
- get to the installation site of the recording equipment,
- agree with the person responsible for the video recording system,
- shoot a video
- determine the identity of the suspect.
Reaching the installation site is not always easy. There are difficult economic relations at the facilities, and even when recording equipment is right outside the door, it is unlikely that they will open it, even if there are crusts, as the owner of the equipment or the owner of the keys must also be found.
')
Negotiating with the person in charge should be done quickly, as usually small enterprises do not keep video recording for more than two weeks, and archives are overwritten cyclically.
Making a video is also a problem. Basically, the problem in understanding this mechanism is the man in the street. This is only in TV shows, you can connect to the camera through the floor of the country and watch the live video. This can be done only in very large companies at the level of cellular operators or banks. On most objects, video recorders are autonomous. And, although the new equipment has the ability to broadcast to the network, not every installer and integrator gives the equipment this opportunity.
The problem is just that connecting a specific device to the internal network of the enterprise and dragging through the network gigabytes of video traffic every day from each remote object from the security guards will not have enough hands or channel thickness, especially considering that this channel can not to be, and the construction of infrastructure in some places is economically unprofitable. The maximum for whom you can count in this situation is the employee who will go and save everything you need manually.
The owners of small private offices and even stores of large chains in the coffin saw someone provide access to their registrars through the network, and even connect recorders to the internal network of the enterprise. They hold video surveillance in order to monitor their employees and record internal minor incidents such as breaking shop windows or petty theft. And even, considering that the default passwords, practically none of the owners of these systems change, it is often impossible to connect from the outside to the recording equipment because of the lack of physical access to it, or constant control by the staff of access to the equipment.
Sometimes at large sites such as factories, the guard watches in real time images from cameras, but this is the exception rather than the rule. You need to understand that the video surveillance operator has to pay for staring at the screen, and only large enterprises can afford it. In the overwhelming majority of cases, in real time, no one follows the cameras, because this is a dog's work.
In fact, videotapes are searched in the video archive by the date and time of the incident. A real observation can be seen unless the transfer through the fence,
It is difficult to determine the identity of a person in a video from conventional video surveillance systems. If this person was initially not familiar to the guard and the security officer, did not become familiar at the facility, then only the special services can determine the person by video. I did not see any commercial search systems for the portrait.
In addition, to get a good portrait in most cases with the cameras is impossible. The typical resolution of most surveillance cameras does not exceed 700 TV lines, cameras are installed at a height of more than two and a half meters and cover large spaces. Almost no one puts on the camera long-focus (with a small angle of coverage) lenses aimed at the doorway. The lenses and protective glasses of the covers are often dirty, and this greatly affects the quality of the picture. Well, if the chambers are cleaned once a year, they often collect dust during the entire service life. The owners do not like to spend money on system maintenance. In addition, video is rarely recorded at a frequency of 24 frames per second, usually 6 or less. Therefore, the portraits on the videos are blurry.
Separately, I will talk about IP video surveillance. Yes, this is the least protected from unauthorized access system, again, there is a constant access to the network, default passwords, backdoors and jambs of firmware, allowing access to Linux on board the camera, all this is present. Yes, the picture quality from such cameras is significantly higher than from analog ones. Sometimes the quality is amazing. But the human factor plays a role here too: disk space for video from IP cameras is much more necessary, which is not always taken into account. The cost of the cameras themselves is at least ten times higher than that of analog ones. Contractors do not have enough qualified specialists to work with this equipment, and IT specialists at the site do not help contractors in principle. Good cameras are expensive, very expensive, our branded (aka Taiwanese / Chinese) suffer from childhood diseases - there are no pre-sale combat testing from manufacturers for which the cameras sometimes do not survive the warranty period. Optics (lenses) often do not match the resolution and quality of multi-megapixel arrays, which is why some models of IP cameras do not have much better picture quality than analog cameras.
Examples:
- Installers of ATM skimmers - the portraits are good, but only after customers complain to the SAT of the ATM host bank if the attacker did not guess to close the cameras or if the first complaints were received before the registrar overwritten the archive.
- Thieves in the store, in the warehouse - the portrait will be, but not the fact that good. Employees will be recognized (it happens that they will be recognized by hairstyle, gait, habits), or the police will recognize the stranger, or through their own channels, security guards.
- Fighting on the street - only the silhouettes of the participants and witnesses will be visible.
- Car theft - car model (number is not always), the approximate time of the incident, the approximate number of witnesses.
- Accident - the date, time of the accident, the model car participants / witnesses.
- Throwing over the fence of the plant - if far from the camera, then only the time and place, although there are options related to the fact that at the factory, in principle, you can track who was where at what time.
- For IP cameras everything is better. In the rooms they allow you to get detailed portraits with sufficient illumination of the face and good fps recording. Outdoor IP cameras during the day can allow you to see the car number, driver's face, pedestrians, if you hang correctly. At night without illumination all their advantages disappear.
From all this, I personally suggest the conclusion: with the existing system of video surveillance integration (more precisely, the absence of this system), with a low equipment service culture, with the low professionalism of the vast majority of people employed in this industry (here you have to be not just a safe person, not just an electronic engineer with knowledge of optics, not just an IT specialist, and not even an office with such specialists, you need to be this all in one person, and still not be lazy to climb the pillars to the cameras), with laziness and a small number of operational workers and places
paranoia about instant identification by recording from surveillance cameras has the right to be only for those who work in buildings with surveillance on offices and corridors, for those who can be purposefully monitored, or for those who are doing something inappropriate under observation if someone else knows about it.
Source: https://habr.com/ru/post/199254/
All Articles