Difference between revisions of "Home Automation"
From Makers Local 256
m (→Cons: Added my two cents) |
(→Entry Automation: comments) |
||
| Line 1: | Line 1: | ||
=Entry Automation= | =Entry Automation= | ||
| + | == General Implementation Notes == | ||
| + | * The system needs to be powered, and preferably include a UPS | ||
| + | * Overriding key access is nice for graceful failure | ||
| + | ** Of course, this just underlines the fact that this is an access registry system more than anything | ||
| + | * Probably need a normal handle in the door with an electric door strike for the cheapest implementation. | ||
| + | * If the implementation simply replaces the metal key with a token, it will have the same problems. Unless two- or three-factor authentication is used and/or the physical security of the lock and door are improved, it's about as secure as it was. | ||
| + | |||
==RFID== | ==RFID== | ||
===Pros=== | ===Pros=== | ||
| Line 15: | Line 22: | ||
** Some writers are substantially more expensive. Q: Why the price difference? | ** Some writers are substantially more expensive. Q: Why the price difference? | ||
* Need a server | * Need a server | ||
| − | |||
| − | |||
==iButton== | ==iButton== | ||
| Line 26: | Line 31: | ||
* 1 wire interface may be fakable with any interface that has the same signal levels (very cheap and easy buttonforging) | * 1 wire interface may be fakable with any interface that has the same signal levels (very cheap and easy buttonforging) | ||
** ''prove it'' --[[User:Strages|strages]] 20:18, 8 May 2008 (CDT) | ** ''prove it'' --[[User:Strages|strages]] 20:18, 8 May 2008 (CDT) | ||
| + | ** ''It doesn't matter. Old keys are still eliminated from the system. And the threat of theft through kicking the door in is much higher than copying a valid key.'' --[[User:Korc|Korc]] 20:51, 8 May 2008 (CDT) | ||
* User may forget to log their entry to the area. | * User may forget to log their entry to the area. | ||
** If door is open, no incentive to use key | ** If door is open, no incentive to use key | ||
Revision as of 20:51, 8 May 2008
Contents
[hide]Entry Automation
General Implementation Notes
- The system needs to be powered, and preferably include a UPS
- Overriding key access is nice for graceful failure
- Of course, this just underlines the fact that this is an access registry system more than anything
- Probably need a normal handle in the door with an electric door strike for the cheapest implementation.
- If the implementation simply replaces the metal key with a token, it will have the same problems. Unless two- or three-factor authentication is used and/or the physical security of the lock and door are improved, it's about as secure as it was.
RFID
Pros
- Hands-off access
- Hands-off tracking of access
- As long as user has their RFID tag on them, their presence within a certain proximity around the reader will be recorded.
Cons
- Keys easily stolen with anonymity
Implementation
Materials
- Need a reader with good range. Can be found for under $100
- To build a system that can perform coming/going detection, would need two readers. or 1 + N readers, where N is the number of approachable directions
- Need a writer. Under $100
- Some writers are substantially more expensive. Q: Why the price difference?
- Need a server
iButton
Pros
- Rotating keys are available
- Someone must have physical access to the fob to capture the non-rotating key
Cons
- Hands-on access
- 1 wire interface may be fakable with any interface that has the same signal levels (very cheap and easy buttonforging)
- User may forget to log their entry to the area.
- If door is open, no incentive to use key
- Group of people walk in at once
- Someone knocks and has the door opened for them
- All these Cons are valid for any system --Korc 19:26, 8 May 2008 (CDT)
