Liber8or

I ordered a QSee QR414-411-3 (4 Channel H.264 Network DVR CIF Real Time or D1 Recording w/ 4 Color CMOS Cameras and 320GB Hard Drive) from Amazon.com. The product details are located at http://q-see.com/products/security-product.php?ProductId=256 Perhaps I got started on a bad note with this product because FedEx delivered it to my neighbor, despite correct address information? Upon opening the box, which was clearly labeled as containing two wide-angle and two narrow-angle cameras, I discovered they had included the wrong kit. Instead of getting four cameras, a four-way power splitter and four power/video cables, I received two cameras, two ridiculous decoy cameras, a two-way power splitter and two power/video cables. Naturally, Murphy ensured it is Saturday (they are not open) and that they don't open until 12 PM on Monday (my time). I'm sure this problem will be rectified; everyone makes mistakes, right? The DVR was easy to setup. The firmware is not overly impressive, but seems to be about what I expected. The camera quality is average, about what I expected, and I can live with it. I'm not trying to build the perfect system, just an affordable system. Minor annoyance: the USB-mouse is not recognized after the DVR reboots, so you have to physically unplug the USB connection and plug it back in for it to put the cursor back on the screen. Getting the web viewer working was tricky, although the manual's instructions were correct. It only runs in Internet Explorer and is .cab file-based. It makes heavy use of ActiveX (the same .ocx components are used in the web platform as well as the "installed" version). As a heavy Chrome user, this is a problem for me. It also means that monitoring my home is not as simple as pulling up "any ol' browser" and logging in. If I have to change 1,000 ActiveX trust settings, it's not going to be pretty. Luckily, the iPhone application worked pretty well, after I completely disregarded the printed materials and read the firmware upgrade page on the Q-See website. The paperwork said to download "APlayer," which crashed everytime it connected to the DVR. Finally, I saw the website's notice and downloaded the correct app, which worked quite well: Finally, turning on the web viewer password controls, I couldn't log in to the admin portion of the web interface. I determined it was my fault, because I enabled the password settings before actually setting a password that was known to me. At first I thought, "Well, I'll just have to reset the DVR using the box, thereby losing all my settings." That was acceptable because I hadn't customized much. So, before I did that, I decided to search the PDF manual for the word password, just in case I missed something about resetting the password(s). Then, I came across this jewel in the publicly accessible PDF manual for this DVR: This works from the console and the web viewer. Am I the only person who finds this an egregious problem? Perhaps I'm missing a method for turning off this huge exploit? It would seem that right now, if someone knows my IP address, or happens to port scan for the open port (thank God I didn't use port 80 as they suggested), they can see and control my cameras (it gives admin access). The password exploit problem is enough to cause me to return this unit. It's the last straw in what I see as a poorly thrown-together CCTV solution. Fundamentally, I can't help but wonder what kind of vulnerabilities might be present in the system if they intentionally created something like that. If the password reset was hardware-based I'd understand, as one can somewhat limit the physical access to the box and there probably should be some way to reset the password (especially with a consumer model).

Awesome! Glad it helped. I love to use the app on my iOS devices. The iPad screen looks great, especially propped up on the case. My iPhone also handles it well, even over 3G. I sometimes set it up at work on my desk; I get lots of questions.

I am using IP Cam Viewer Pro v1.8.3 for iOS on my iPhone 4. I have a Samsung SDE-120N DVR, which is supposedly compatible with this application. However, any time I try to add a camera from the DVR, it returns "Error: Could not retrieve data." The port configuration is all set up correctly, and verified. The developer has put it a few hours remotely accessing my DVR to troubleshoot the problem, which was somewhat of a mystery to him because he seems to think I have old firmware. I figured I'd start this thread for anyone who might need this information later. The rub is that there is no published firmware updates for the SDE-120N, according to the Samsung support sites. I have not contacted Samsung support yet. Tonight I took a leap of faith and downloaded "SDE-3170_3002_V1.02_101119.zip" from Samsung's site. It's designed for the 3000-series DVRs, but I foolishly decided to try it (although I did no further harm). The "SDE-3170_3002_V1.02_101119.nbn" file was extracted from the ZIP and placed on a thumb drive. The thumb drive was pushed into the front of the DVR and through the DVRs menu and it located the firmware and performed the upgrade. First a progress bar appeared, which went all the way to the right and maxed out for several minutes before the upgrade was complete. A beep was heard, it rebooted. I am using the VGA output of the DVR for monitoring. The boot screen is now jacked up (as you can see in the image), but once the DVR came up, there seems to be no other impacts from the alternate firmware update. However, the upgrade, brought the DVR to V1.02_101119 from V1.01_100720 on the system information screen. I have emailed the developer to advise him the firmware was upgraded (although I have no idea if it has any effect when upgraded with the binaries intended for a different machine). More to come as the situation unfolds; hopefully this helps someone later.

RESOLVED So, after communicating with the friend who has successfully used this DVR on his Android device, I gave him test credentials on my DVR. He set it up successfully and sent me his configuration. The trick: apparently the RTSP driver just altogether doesn't work for either device. All along, he has had his phone set up as HTTP, which essentially just downloads images at a rapid rate, as I understand it. In order to get the option to use HTTP, instead of RTSP, you must select "Samsung SME DVR" instead. Once that was selected, and the connection details entered, it worked. See images below (please note, in the third image, I recognize it says port 8888, but that was not the port I was using all along for RTSP testing; I just made the screenshot in a hurry): Image 1: Working Cameras Image 2: SME Settings including HTTP option Image 3: SDE Settings which allow only RTSP

UPDATE: No response yet from developer on situation now that firmware has been upgraded. EDIT: I emailed a friend, and he successfully set up the cameras on his Android version of the same app with no issues. It appears to be isolated to iOS.

I should have mentioned, a good friend's father has the same DVR model, and the IP Cam Viewer application works well for him. I have made a request for him to inspect his father's DVR and report to me the firmware version in use.

1. A teenage citrus thief doing doing a "pick and run" from my neighbors grapefruit trees. Doesn't seem to be an ongoing issue, so I didn't really tell anyone. 2. A street fight, which included my neighbors son, wherein he beat the tar out of a guy who rides his motorcycle too fast down our street and near their children. Because the video implicated the neighbor's son as the primary aggressor, and because I wish to remain at peace with my neighbor, and because I felt like the motorcyclist probably deserved it, I didn't share my video tape with the police.

If you've been following my post on the Q-See QR414 (http://www.cctvforum.com/viewtopic.php?f=56&t=23410), you may be interested in this topic. After the frustrations with the Q-See product, I began to research other consumer or prosumer grade DVR/camera packages available. I really wanted to buy locally this time, as I've had enough of the Internet mail-order gig for a while. So, after sending the Q-See package back to Amazon (for a full refund, I assume, to be determined). A good friend, and fellow nerd who had heard of my troubles with the Q-See, called me about a unit for sale at Sam's Club. It turned out to be the Samsung SDE-120N for about $550. It comes with four cameras, two IR and two color. I've not yet installed, but I've been tinkering with the network setup and DVR functions. I've got a temporary camera pointed out a window right now while I evaluate its performance. So, this unit is roughly $250 more than the Q-See package. I intentionally did not research the Q-See offerings at that price point because I was a bit turned off (perhaps this was shortsighted). Again, I wanted to go local, so that if I have to return it, I can travel three miles to the store and get my money back instantly, rather than waiting on people in a fulfillment center some place. Some observations so far (I know it may be unfair, but I can't help compare it to the QR414 package): Well-built (cameras and DVR); has that certain je ne sais quoi of a sturdy product 500 gb HDD, rather than 320 gb Integrated camera cables, similar to s-video Web-interface just works, even in Chrome Mobile phone interface just works, even in Safari on iPhone Superior camera quality No gaping security flaws like a default password The manual seems to be in almost native English, well formatted, not haphazardly assembled. No major errata, that I've noticed. The firmware has a certain sophistication about it; a well-planned UI. Includes VGA video out, which means I can now use my computer monitor instead of lugging a TV into my office. The VGA video out is of superior quality compared to BNC composite out. Flaws with this system, so far: The password that the DVR uses to authenticate with an SMTP provider to send notifications only holds a certain number of characters. I had to change the password on my GMail account to a shorter password (I think less than 20 or 16) in order to get it to work. I plan to create a separate account just for this purpose, so long term, this is not a problem. There may be better options for the money I paid, but I do know that most places didn't have this Samsung model for this price and, with regard to local selection, there wasn't a lot to choose from except the "crap-sumer grade" stuff similar to what I had already experienced. For my money, and local purchase, this fit the bill. Hope this helps someone in my situation decide on a product.

I figured I'd post a general update after answering the last question. The cameras are still working well, but I have found I don't use the remote viewer as often as I thought I would. Funny enough, using this system I found out my yard guy was doing more work than I thought, so I gave him a little bonus. I haven't posted any nighttime images from the web viewer. Below is an image I captured just a minute ago. Please keep in mind that it looks MUCH better in full resolution on the monitor attached to the DVR. The web version is always lower quality, and its really obvious at night. If you could see the monitor, you'd be amazed at the quality difference at night between it and the web. You can see my frustration with camera four (back yard), and my need for more lighting. It's very dark and rarely lit. Objects show up well, but I'd like a nice picture like I get in the front yard with the ambient light that is there. Obviously the short throw IR camera on the porch works perfectly in any light. I have had trouble getting the sensitivity settings just right, so I get a lot of birds and bugs. Especially at night on camera four, it's triggering stupid motion alarms all night. I'm sure this is all just my fault. My wife is in love with the system, and told me she wasn't so sure when I first proposed the idea, but now she's glad I chose to do this.

I don't know enough to open the casing and inspect the insides, so I hope this description helps... Of the four cameras, only one is minimally exposed (the porch) with zero sun and near zero weather. The two cameras on the front yard are what I would (arbitrarily) call only 40-50% exposed (well under the eave, shaded most of the day and don't get a lot of direct sunlight or weather, given typical weather patterns). However, the last camera in the back yard is what I would call 90% exposed (toward the edge of the eave, direct sunlight for most of the day, lots of rain and wind). I can't discern a difference in the picture from the screenshot I attached below and what it looks like today, so I guess the internals of the camera are fine. As for the outside, they have the expected amount of dust, dirt, bugs and spider webs, but the cameras seem to be well sealed and still solid. I wipe them down and knockdown the spider webs and wasp nests when I think about it. The finish on the casing seems to be doing well and they are certainly still attractive looking. On a side note, the friend who helped me install my system has purchased the exact same system for use at his lady friend's home, where we will be co-installing it this weekend.

If you are following my saga, you'll be glad to know the Samsung SDE-120N is installed. The equipment seems to work quite well for the price. The screenshot below shows the view from my the Internet Explorer quad-view. I may post more screenshots later, but I'm feeling lazy. Obviously, the best quality is on the VGA output of the DVR. The cameras are probably not pointing where they will aim forever, with the exception of the front door camera. I'm amazed by the cameras wide angle; I was able to cover front windows, part of porch and door, all with one camera (it's infrared, by the way). The other two cameras on the front yard are color cameras and work pretty well in low light. The back camera is the other IR camera. I'm not thrilled with the positioning and the back yard is basically zero light. When I turn on the floods or the motion sensor sets them off, the camera works decently well. I'm considering an IR flood setup of some kind for the back yard. The installation was performed with the help of an old friend who is in better shape than me. We used a disposable Tyvek suit and "fishing rods." This was an excuse to purchase a 36" flexible drill bit extension, too. Since we moved in to our new home, this is the first major installation I've done. The security system was pre-wired. The single camera wire, despite its flaws, is very easy to install. The camera mounts were sturdy and mounted easily to various surfaces. I don't know if I feel the wing nut that holds the camera in position is as sturdy as I'd like it to be (there's some amount of slippage), but that could be my imagination. It wasn't enough to affect the positioning of the cameras. By far, the hardest part was crawling through the attic, which I didn't do. I traded some database services to my best friend, who crawled on my behalf. The DVR functions are easy to use, and I've already configured motion event logs for certain cameras. The wife can easily use this system, as well as my four year old. If you have any questions that I can answer, just shout.

Here's what I'm looking at on Chrome. Please note: The cam image is sitting inside, not mounted, looking through a screen window (screen + glass) and in a poorly lit area. Again, it's just in test mode so far. Yes, that's a wooden deer, festive, I know.

It looks exactly like that! Must be rebranding. Interesting, who manufactures that model? I'll post some screenshots when I get the cameras properly installed; I'm getting a little rotund around the waistline, so I've got to wait on my skinny friend to help me in the attic.

You're absolutely right. The first thing I did was load it in IE, after monkeying with the ActiveX stuff. It has a few more features, enabled by the use of ActiveX. But for what I need, which is to look at each camera live from the Net, the basic image refresh (which works because it regards Chrome as coming from the Safari browser). So, while it's not the perfect solution, it doesn't require me to sacrifice any of my needs on the altar of ActiveX (unintentional though it may be).

It supports BNC video inputs also (in addition to the integrated cables), so theoretically, I think I could use other cameras in a pinch. There's not really much to add to the Chrome piece, except that I simply loaded the web viewer in Chrome, typed in the user name and password, and voila! The Safari bit, not surprisingly (given their common code base), just works also, in the same way. No pop-ups, security configurations, etc.

If you've been following this thread, check out my experience with the new Samsung unit I purchased to replace the QR414, which I've returned. http://www.cctvforum.com/viewtopic.php?f=56&t=23530

If you are willing to share, what would you consider the next step up from these entry-level systems (i.e. the next price point and maybe some example system models)? Perhaps the next price point contains some models with the feature set I desire? By the way, what don't you like about the GE Concord alarm panel? It seemed pretty robust to me, as a layman. I'm always interested in alternative views on products I own.

I've contacted the Q-See technical support line and the customer service line. The technical support representative was very kind and acknowledged that the firmware running on the QR414 doesn't support disabling the "god" password. He didn't think there would be another firmware upgrade to add that feature. He suggested, as I suspected they would, to run the system on a port other than 80. He acknowledged its a problem, but he's probably right about someone needing to be very determined to find my system and log in. However, that's not good enough for me, but I appreciate his understanding attitude. So, I spoke with customer service regarding the two missing cameras (I received two decoys in place of two of the four cameras I was supposed to get). She acknowledged that I could take care of that through an RMA with Q-See, but that if I wanted to return the product all together I should approach that through Amazon. Amazon was helpful and issued a RMA label for the product. I'll be shipping it off tonight, if I have the time. I decided to browse some other options available in stores locally. I found that CompUSA offers a very similar product (made by NightOwl) for about the same price. In fact, it seemed eerily "all too similar." After visiting their website and seeing some screenshots, I was able to determine (with reasonable certainty) that NightOwl is using the same Chinese firmware that is causing my instant problem. I'm on my lunch break right now, so I don't have time to do a whole lot of research right now. It's back to the drawing board. So, CCTV pros, what to do now? Any suggestions on an affordable home CCTV option that works natively with any browser and doesn't have a backdoor exploit?

Not a real solution for me, but an OK hack, I guess. If I want my browser to process things like the worst browser in the world, then I'll just go ahead and use the worst browser in the world.

Fair enough. But at least in that case it's not intentional and published in the manual for the device.

I'll probably wait until Monday to give them a chance to explain or clear up the issue if it's user error. If the password issue cannot be resolved, I'll start seriously looking at other models. I don't want to give the impression that I am expecting too much from a consumer grade model. I don't expect ultra-fine recording quality or zero problems. I do however expect to receive what I ordered, have the documentation match the product and not have my system open to the world through a back door. I tend to compare this experience with my GE Concord security system. Surely there are better, more expensive, panels. However, I installed that myself, with almost zero help from SafeMart. The documentation GE provides is wonderful and complete. Also, if you break into my home, there is not a single master code that can be used to reset my alarm panel, nor through the web interface. I think Q-See could go a long way in the market by hiring a consultant to rewrite their documentation (i.e. write it in native English), redesign their user interfaces, and provide a consistent approach to documentation across the board (think strategic product experience). Consumers expect this of all vendors now, not just high-end products. Here's an example of what I mean... have a look at the diagram on page 4 (actual PDF page 8 ) of this manual. Item#8 on that page is the strangest looking USB connection I've ever seen! I wonder if the USB-IF knows about that one? http://q-see.com/files/manuals/QR414-ManualWeb.pdf

Using the IE interface from my computer at work and a computer at a friend's home, I am able to log in to the DVR using the default admin password. Neither are local to my network, nor have accessed the interface before using the passwords I established. So, it would seem it's not for local access only. I also have not been able to locate instructions for disabling the "default" password. EDIT: It's probably poor form for me to refer to this as the "default admin password," because I changed that. I also changed the default user password, as well as the mobile password. I'm referring to something more powerful; a built-in backdoor "god" password that I cannot turn off and works from anywhere.

I just plugged in the QR-414 DVR that I received today, and was shocked to learn there is a master password, clearly documented in the manual's FAQ section, that allows you to have admin access to the box with no questions asked.