On 02/08/18 04:59, Tim wrote: > Allegedly, on or about 7 February 2018, Ed Greshko sent: >> I guess I'm not clear on how things are supposed to work. It sounded >> to me as if the camera was uploading videos into their cloud and if >> someone wanted to view it they would access the cloud and not the >> camera directly. > Some cameras merely use a central server as a way of finding your > camera by a name (ala dynamic DNS, mine initially lets you find it by > serial number, if I recall correctly) and for traversing NAT. Sure. But have a look at https://amcrest.com/cloud. ; And then check out the pricing and descriptions. It seems to me you can have your camera streaming to their cloud and recording as well as playing back live. Also, seems you can set triggers to record on motion only. Or, schedule when the recording happens. With more than one camera this seems to provide a central place to view all cameras as opposed to connecting to a camera individually. And, of course, it isn't free. > > One option to using these kind of cameras more safely, might be if your > router has a demilitarised zone (DMZ). The router will forward > specific traffic to it, and not allow it (your camera) to interact with > your LAN. This does require that your cameras are connected directly > to the router, not sharing a switch with your LAN. I don't think this is the type of method employed in the "cloud" scenario. The other option is to buy their recorder that allows you to record content locally and allow access to that device through your FW in a DMZ. I think it is important to understand what the products and services of the company and may even the model camera Bob as bought. -- A motto of mine is: When in doubt, try it out
Attachment:
signature.asc
Description: OpenPGP digital signature
_______________________________________________ users mailing list -- users@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx To unsubscribe send an email to users-leave@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
