groovyman

yes i know all that. but we are not talking on protecting a bank system or nasa. by changing ports will make it more secure than port 80. or just allow mac address through router even more secure. but at the moment this tread is going way off line to the point of spending more money to the op to use a VPN router inline. but reading through the posts the op has not even got external connection working yet. (he only has local) on both PCs and mobiles. external connection need to be working first before he spends more money on VPN. Ummm, a solution was provided to use the VPN capabilities built into Windows which will take care of the username/password issue. This won't cost anything but a little time. I guess that part was skipped over? Selective reading perhaps? And it doesn't matter that's it's not a bank system or nasa. To even say something like that, well, all I can say in reply is I'm happy you're not securing my network. No offense.

Tom, just changing port numbers does not make a network secure - it's a false sense of security. It's a good rule of thumb to change default port numbers to ones that aren't used for anything else, but by only doing that it's like locking one door and leaving another open. The open, unprotected communication port is still unprotected, exposed and can be found with port scanning tools.

Here's another step by step guide on setting up a vpn using windows 7: http://www.pcworld.com/article/210562/how_to_set_up_vpn_in_windows_7.html

The VPN router would go between the Fios router and Trendnet switch. First a VPN connection would be made to the vpn router which will create an encrypted tunnel with your device (smartphone, laptop, desktop, etc.). Then you can access resources on the network as if you were physically on the network itself. Very simply, once connected via the VPN router you would use the internal IP address of the NVR because at this point the vpn router will handle all incoming requests. The VPN router actually assigns an internal ip address over the tunnel. Now, there are methods where a vpn router isn't needed and a vpn connection can be made directly to a PC or Server on the network. See these threads on getting started: http://www.sevenforums.com/tutorials/4517-virtual-private-network-vpn-enable-incoming-vpn-connections.html http://theillustratednetwork.mvps.org/Vista/PPTP/PPTPVPN.html

You could setup a VPN. That will secure the network against unauthorized access.

Yes I've used a few of them when a client wants a camera mounted outdoors. I've also used them to replace some old IR outdoor cameras. There's another model for indoors that's a little cheaper and I've used them more often (can't remember the model right now - have to dig up invoices). Whatever camera I use all depends on the environment where they're being installed.

How is the picture quality on the CNB DFL20S? I'm thinking of getting it because of the price but I'm leaning towards more for with the VCM24VF. I've been satisfied with them. I posted a night screenshot here: viewtopic.php?f=53&t=30651&p=191907#p191907 Daytime is great, except for that rainbow effect in some environments. Since posting that question I've gone back to play around with rotating the lens which has helped. I guess it's the way the light reflects off some surfaces. It's worse in areas that have different fluorescent bulbs in different fixtures.

I'm thinking something like LogMeIn, TeamViewer or other VNC software on the NVR will do what you want.

Simple, just setup a username and password for your NVR. Yes, for the most part that's true. However usernames & passwords do not provide 100% protection against unauthorized access, especially to someone determined to break in. Too many vulnerabilities exist, especially when usernames and passwords are sent over the Internet in plain text. You never know who or what may be sniffing the wires and what information is being collected. I don't want to turn this into a discussion on password security or conspiracy theories. My years spent wokring with a company producing encryption devices for corporate and government networks has forever changed the way I view electronic communications. I just want to point out that when dealing with the Internet vulnerabilities are always present. I'm posting these links from Wikipedia.org and I'm shutting up about the subject (everyone, hold your applause, please ): http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Password http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Computer_insecurity

This is the Fios router... http://support.actiontec.com/doc_files/MI424WR_Rev._E&F_User_Manual_20.10.7_v1_GPL.pdf I'll check the manual and the log into to when I get home to see if there is that option. A quick look through the manual and it appears that it does not natively support encrypted connections, except when it comes to remote access & management of the router itself. That's ok, because most routers don't have this feature - however some do and that's why I mentioned it. It does support VPN passthrough though, meaning that it will accept and pass-through vpn data packets originating via the Internet.

That's OK. A VPN router can be placed behind the Verizon device if that's the route you choose to go. There are other techniques as well - using a VPN router is just one that I happen to like and wanted to mention Also, take a look at the interface on the Verizon router. It's possible that some sort of secure remote functionality might be a built-in feature, either via VPN or other type of authentication. I'm not in a Verizon area and never used their equipment, so I don't know.

Yep - I know that very well living in FL. We don't need to deal with the cold weather, but it's 85F+ for most of the year. When working outside, wearing a light cap with a sunsheild (similar to a foreign legion hat) or wearing a wet towel over your head/under your cap, sunglasses, sunscreen and keeping well hydrated are important.

I don't understand what the tech told you. First, that the device cannot be accessed from a remote site, then that it can only be accessed with CMS software. Well, either the device can be accessed over the internet or not. Can you access the NVR locally using a web browser? If you can, then it's highly probable that it can be accessed using a web browser from a remote site as well. There are several ways the NVR can be secured against unauthorized access. Changing the port number from the defaults to something else and using a username & password is a good start. I would google the term "secure remote access" and just start reading to learn about different techniques that can be used. Personally, I like using VPN routers. They can be purchased in the $150-$200 range and work very well. This is a very good line of defense against unauthorized remote intrusion to your network. They require that a VPN connection is first established before any network resources can be accessed.

Out of the box with no security configured, nothing.

Like we all don't know this already, right? Went to a store today to perform maintenance on a POS system and noticed the surveillance system. Store opened in January which was the last time I was there, so it's a very recent install. Owner told me he paid $850 complete with installation for a 4 channel PC based system, but it doesn't work properly, he doesn't know how to playback video, can't connect remotely via a PC or smartphone and he cannot get ahold of the installer. What a freakin' surprise huh? Wires are visible everywhere, very cheap cameras, terrible camera placement and the DVR is sitting on the floor in a hallway where employees walk past all day everyday. Installer ran 4 RG59 cables behind a bulletin board which is now cracked from buldging out from the wall. Oh, and it's plugged into a small power strip along with the camera power supply (wall wart). Has the cheapest i-inc 19" monitor connected and the live stream looks all washed out. Kind of reminds me of those really cheap qsee cameras with horrible color reproduction I always see with those dvr-in-a-box packages. I wouldn't be surprised if it's a cheap qsee card in the PC. He asked me if I could fix it. I replied "Yupp, but it's called replacing it, not fixing it" and proceeded to show him a couple of recent installs via smartphone and remote software. He got all excited......until I started giving him prices (hardware only - wasn't worth getting into installation charges). He's staying with what he has, which is good for nothing. Completely threw his money away in my opinion

For a Hybrid DVR take a look at the Aver Nano series. I gave my opinions of the system here: viewtopic.php?f=3&t=30147 Since then Aver has improved the Web interface (viewing via Internet Explorer) and added a few new features in their latest firmware release. The release notes can be viewed in the download section of their website, averusa.com or surveillance.aver.com.

Yeah, that's one thing that sets costco apart from other places. It sucks when the policy has to be utilized though. I'd much rather have something reliable (I'm sure you'll agree). I've been working with electronic devices over many years and any device can develop issue at any time, but when the same devices develop the same issue within the same amount of time you know it's something wrong with the product. By the way, for anyone reading this, my intent is not to bash QSee. I've been happy with the record quality of these systems (when they worked ). But, as the saying goes, you buy cheap you get cheap Don't expect too much and you won't be disappointed

Thanks for the follow up and posting the screenshots. Just an FYI. I had 2 QSee systems die this week that are out of warranty. These were purchased at the same time about 2 years ago and both exhibited the same issue within a week of each other. Essentially the dvr will not recognize the hard drive, so it stopped recording. Can still access the dvr via network or Internet and it gives no indication that anything is wrong, until you try to playback video - nothing is there. The hard drive in each system is fine though. I tested by trying to install a new hard drive in each dvr (no luck) and installing the hard drives taken from the systems in a spare (the drives work fine). I'm not seeking help to fix the issue as the next stop for these systems is a landfill. They served their purpose for a couple of years and now it's on to something better. Just posting for information only. Reliability of these systems = not so good.

What????

When u spend about 10 years in CCTV retail you quickly learn how to save time,minimise headache,filter a...s holes and so on.... Not just CCTV. This can be said for any business.

Here ya go: Port Forwarding QSee QSD2316L on the Actiontec MI-424-WR http://portforward.com/english/routers/port_forwarding/Actiontec/MI-424-WR/QSee_QSD2316L.htm

It's the DSL upload bandwidth. I have access to 20 locations with DSL and all of them have live remote viewing issues due to the limits of the DSL upstream. Upload at these locations are from 300Kbps-500Kbps with a couple having 150Kbps. When live remote viewing of more than 1 channel occurs more data is being uploaded than the upload stream can handle which results in dropped frames, stuttering and pausing. It's certainly better at the 500Kbps locations than the others. Quality, framerate and other settings in the DVR (if available) can help. Some of the DVRs I've used have the ability to limit bandwidth globally or per channel. There's sometimes also a setting to only view key frames in 4 screen mode which helps alot. It may only send 1-2 fps per channel when viewing 4 channels, but you still see everything and I find it does not adversely affect the bandwidth at the remote site too much. Many routers also have QoS settings which allow you to set priority for certain types of data, specific ports or limit the amount of bandwidth per port. As you go forward just keep in mind that this is an imperfect science and you'll need to play around with record and bandwidth settings until you find a happy medium between the two and, realistically, don't expect 100% smooth live remote viewing via the Internet unless the upload bandwidth can handle it.

Everyone I know who's purchased one of those NightOwl or QSee bundled system has been very disappointed with the cameras. Color reproduction has been terrible, if you have bright light coming into the store thats pretty much all you'll see (washes everything out) and the "Night Vision" is a joke. Even under good lighting conditions they've never been able to get decent images with them. An incident happens in your store. On video it appears the suspect is wearing a light purple shirt, in reality it's black. Description is wrong, suspect gets away. I've purchased some stand alone QSee DVRs in the past and have been happy with the D1 record quality when used with decent cameras. My suggestion - if you want the QSee of Night Owl DVR, fine, but don't buy those cameras as you'll be wasting time, effort and money. Don't wait to "possibly upgrade to 600vtl Dome style camera's for the more crucial area's instore." Get better cameras for every area of the store from the start

Since you mentioned it: Verizon doubles FiOS speeds to 300Mbps http://arstechnica.com/information-technology/2012/05/faster-than-your-router-verizon-doubles-fios-speeds-to-300mbps/ In my area Comcast has been upgrading the network. 100Mbps download 10Mbps upload is available in certain locations. Cost a couple hundred per month though.

This happens to one of my client's IR cameras every few days. It's a KT&C bullet IR camera. Web/Spider keeps triggering motion detection and blocks the field of view. The rear light is left on & I'm going to replace it with a CNB Mona Lisa once I get the go ahead.