Video over IP - Is it all Hype?
 |
| |
 |
| |
 |
| |
 |
| |
 |
| |
 |
The Internet, computers, and other new electronic devices have certainly created new and
incredible improvements in security systems. I am alarmed at how many Security
Managers buy into the video over IP systems hook line and sinker. I will agree with most
that good IP camera system is as good as an old analog camera system. My personal
opinion is that the hybrid system is the smart choice if you require video over IP
functionality. It is important to note that I am writing this in March of 2008. As the landscape
of security systems and CCTV changes, improves, and becomes less expensive my views
will differ.
What are some of the benefits of video over IP? First off it is important to note that video has
been viewable over the Internet for years. Digital Video Recorders have provided this
remote view capability. This is an incredible improvement over old analog systems that
could only be viewed on-site. Now individual cameras stream video anywhere in the world.
In some buildings installation of IP cameras may be less expensive than traditional Analog
cameras. IP cameras also have the option of using WIFI or wireless networks, eliminating
the need for wiring at all.
What are some of the detriments of IP camera systems? First off when IP cameras are
installed you are adding more devices. More devices means more points of failure. You
have the IP camera. An IP camera is a camera and a networking device in one package.
Then you may have a router. If the router whether hardwired or wireless malfunctions you
may loose numerous cameras. Then you have the server. In some cases you may have an
application server and a data server. These servers use RAID technology and are incredibly
reliable, but are still subject to malfunction. Redundant servers are expensive but mitigate
the risk of a total system failure. Then you have the monitoring stations. These monitoring
stations are simply computers. Computers have many components that are subject to
failure to include the NIC card, hard drive, video card, and power supply. If you don't have
local site servers network outages can result in losses of recorded video. When compared
to an analog system there are many more components on an IP system that can fail. If an
IP system is designed properly from the beginning many system failures can be mitigated
just like in a traditional Analog system. Not that it is likely to occur but IP camera networks
are subject to many more technical attacks than an analog system. Outlying and wireless
connections could be exploited by hackers. WIFI could theoretically be jammed causing a
loss of video from all wireless devices. These risks must be considered in the design
phase, and a risk cost analysis should be performed. The cost of IP cameras makes them
unattractive to customers who need to get the most security for their dollar. It is much more
expensive to replace an IP camera than it is to replace an analog camera.
What about maintenance expenses? In general the cost of parts for an analog system are
far less expensive than an IP system. The average security technician will not be able to
maintain your Enterprise IP camera system. You will need network administrators,
computer technicians, and security technicians at one point or the other. The server will
need routine maintenance and updates. Once the system is in, it's in. You really need to
look at the big picture and do a cost benefit analysis before you jump on th IP bandwagon.
OK, so I need IP systems functionality. What should I do? There's no reason you shouldn't
leave an old analog system in place. If it has problems bring it up to speed with
maintenance. As I said before maintenance on an Analog system is all around less
expensive than an IP system. Once your system is in tip top shape you can add Video
Distribution Amplifiers to send the existing camera signals to your legacy system and you
IP video encoders. If you want to make additions to the system you will have many methods
to choose from. If a camera dies on a hybrid system replacement is as cheap and easy as
it ever was.
What about video analytics? Well companies are doing this in many different ways. Some
companies are embedding the analytics at the camera. I'm not so sure this idea appeals to
me. Once they are installed that company may have a monopoly on your system. Many
companies provide software for Video over IP systems, not all Video over IP equipment is
compatible with all software. I still suggest having your video analytics running on the head
end somewhere. Hybrid systems and even Analog systems are easily integrated with
analytics. Many DVR manufacturers incorporate Analytics in their products now, and I am
sure more will as time progresses.
Just because something exists does mean you need it. As a security professional it is your
job to make sure the benefits are worth the cost.
What should I consider before going Video over IP?
Why do I need to upgrade? Is it going to cut cost? What is the benefit? Are the benefits
worth it?
What happens if there is a power outage? Have all pertinent pieces of equipment been
designed with battery back-up?
What happens if there is an Internet service interruption or attack. Is my video being viewed
and recorded locally? If not what are the implications? How much will redundant
communications avenues cost? Will encryption be an option or will it slow down the
network so much video over IP will be impossible?
What is the availability of a Technician to repair the equipment if it malfunctions? What if the
server goes down? What is the cost of repairs?
Am I opening my network up to new vulnerabilities? Will my existing network handle the
new traffic?
In conclusion a hybrid system gives you all of the capability at less expense. In my opinion
hybrid systems should be installed even in new construction. While there is this big drive
toward IP cameras I think that going in that direction is a big mistake. For some mobile
applications and application where more risk is acceptable video over IP may certainly be
the less expensive choice. There certainly needs to be more research before everyone
jumps on the bandwagon.
By:
John Leonard, CPP
Versatek, LLC
www.versateksecurity.com
March 29, 2008
incredible improvements in security systems. I am alarmed at how many Security
Managers buy into the video over IP systems hook line and sinker. I will agree with most
that good IP camera system is as good as an old analog camera system. My personal
opinion is that the hybrid system is the smart choice if you require video over IP
functionality. It is important to note that I am writing this in March of 2008. As the landscape
of security systems and CCTV changes, improves, and becomes less expensive my views
will differ.
What are some of the benefits of video over IP? First off it is important to note that video has
been viewable over the Internet for years. Digital Video Recorders have provided this
remote view capability. This is an incredible improvement over old analog systems that
could only be viewed on-site. Now individual cameras stream video anywhere in the world.
In some buildings installation of IP cameras may be less expensive than traditional Analog
cameras. IP cameras also have the option of using WIFI or wireless networks, eliminating
the need for wiring at all.
What are some of the detriments of IP camera systems? First off when IP cameras are
installed you are adding more devices. More devices means more points of failure. You
have the IP camera. An IP camera is a camera and a networking device in one package.
Then you may have a router. If the router whether hardwired or wireless malfunctions you
may loose numerous cameras. Then you have the server. In some cases you may have an
application server and a data server. These servers use RAID technology and are incredibly
reliable, but are still subject to malfunction. Redundant servers are expensive but mitigate
the risk of a total system failure. Then you have the monitoring stations. These monitoring
stations are simply computers. Computers have many components that are subject to
failure to include the NIC card, hard drive, video card, and power supply. If you don't have
local site servers network outages can result in losses of recorded video. When compared
to an analog system there are many more components on an IP system that can fail. If an
IP system is designed properly from the beginning many system failures can be mitigated
just like in a traditional Analog system. Not that it is likely to occur but IP camera networks
are subject to many more technical attacks than an analog system. Outlying and wireless
connections could be exploited by hackers. WIFI could theoretically be jammed causing a
loss of video from all wireless devices. These risks must be considered in the design
phase, and a risk cost analysis should be performed. The cost of IP cameras makes them
unattractive to customers who need to get the most security for their dollar. It is much more
expensive to replace an IP camera than it is to replace an analog camera.
What about maintenance expenses? In general the cost of parts for an analog system are
far less expensive than an IP system. The average security technician will not be able to
maintain your Enterprise IP camera system. You will need network administrators,
computer technicians, and security technicians at one point or the other. The server will
need routine maintenance and updates. Once the system is in, it's in. You really need to
look at the big picture and do a cost benefit analysis before you jump on th IP bandwagon.
OK, so I need IP systems functionality. What should I do? There's no reason you shouldn't
leave an old analog system in place. If it has problems bring it up to speed with
maintenance. As I said before maintenance on an Analog system is all around less
expensive than an IP system. Once your system is in tip top shape you can add Video
Distribution Amplifiers to send the existing camera signals to your legacy system and you
IP video encoders. If you want to make additions to the system you will have many methods
to choose from. If a camera dies on a hybrid system replacement is as cheap and easy as
it ever was.
What about video analytics? Well companies are doing this in many different ways. Some
companies are embedding the analytics at the camera. I'm not so sure this idea appeals to
me. Once they are installed that company may have a monopoly on your system. Many
companies provide software for Video over IP systems, not all Video over IP equipment is
compatible with all software. I still suggest having your video analytics running on the head
end somewhere. Hybrid systems and even Analog systems are easily integrated with
analytics. Many DVR manufacturers incorporate Analytics in their products now, and I am
sure more will as time progresses.
Just because something exists does mean you need it. As a security professional it is your
job to make sure the benefits are worth the cost.
What should I consider before going Video over IP?
Why do I need to upgrade? Is it going to cut cost? What is the benefit? Are the benefits
worth it?
What happens if there is a power outage? Have all pertinent pieces of equipment been
designed with battery back-up?
What happens if there is an Internet service interruption or attack. Is my video being viewed
and recorded locally? If not what are the implications? How much will redundant
communications avenues cost? Will encryption be an option or will it slow down the
network so much video over IP will be impossible?
What is the availability of a Technician to repair the equipment if it malfunctions? What if the
server goes down? What is the cost of repairs?
Am I opening my network up to new vulnerabilities? Will my existing network handle the
new traffic?
In conclusion a hybrid system gives you all of the capability at less expense. In my opinion
hybrid systems should be installed even in new construction. While there is this big drive
toward IP cameras I think that going in that direction is a big mistake. For some mobile
applications and application where more risk is acceptable video over IP may certainly be
the less expensive choice. There certainly needs to be more research before everyone
jumps on the bandwagon.
By:
John Leonard, CPP
Versatek, LLC
www.versateksecurity.com
March 29, 2008