2 ms·

Locally doesn't mean it has to be stored on the same physical premise thus physical access to cameras does not necessarily mean physical access to storage machi

by tmptmp 10y ago

Locally doesn't mean it has to be stored on the same physical premise thus physical access to cameras does not necessarily mean physical access to storage machines/devices. Great work GP, congrats for taking extra steps. Is there any open-source/documentation that is accessible to more people (not just network experts) on how to do this kind of setup?

Mister_Snuggles 10y ago
There are really three separate problems that need to be solved: * Remote access to your home network * Recording and storage of video, possibly with motion detection and alerting. * Remote storage of video/events (optional). Each problem is "sort of" solved: Most routers have some kind of VPN server built in. My Asus router supports PPTP, which isn't very secure, out of the box. I think some routers are starting to support OpenVPN, but without some easy wizard to set it up and distribute the profiles and certificates it would probably be beyond the average user. A lot of NAS devices come with software to record from IP cameras. My QNAP has it, but I have no idea how good it is as I've never tried it. I know that to use more than two cameras they want you to buy extra licenses. A lot of NAS devices can also sync folders up to various cloud storage providers. This could solve the optional remote storage requirement. As for making it all work together, that's another story. I'm not aware of any kind of easy to follow HOWTO for a user who's goal is "access my cameras remotely without sending everything to the cloud".
walrus01 10y ago
The ubiquiti unifi video server (formerly aircam?) is ridiculously easy to set up on a local x86-64 linux system. They give away the software free for use with their IP cameras. Or it need not be physically local, the server could be on the other end of a VPN tunnel from the layer2 LAN that physically contains multiple security cameras.

by tmptmp 10y ago

Mister_Snuggles 10y ago

There are really three separate problems that need to be solved: * Remote access to your home network * Recording and storage of video, possibly with motion detection and alerting. * Remote storage of video/events (optional). Each problem is "sort of" solved: Most routers have some kind of VPN server built in. My Asus router supports PPTP, which isn't very secure, out of the box. I think some routers are starting to support OpenVPN, but without some easy wizard to set it up and distribute the profiles and certificates it would probably be beyond the average user. A lot of NAS devices come with software to record from IP cameras. My QNAP has it, but I have no idea how good it is as I've never tried it. I know that to use more than two cameras they want you to buy extra licenses. A lot of NAS devices can also sync folders up to various cloud storage providers. This could solve the optional remote storage requirement. As for making it all work together, that's another story. I'm not aware of any kind of easy to follow HOWTO for a user who's goal is "access my cameras remotely without sending everything to the cloud".

walrus01 10y ago

The ubiquiti unifi video server (formerly aircam?) is ridiculously easy to set up on a local x86-64 linux system. They give away the software free for use with their IP cameras. Or it need not be physically local, the server could be on the other end of a VPN tunnel from the layer2 LAN that physically contains multiple security cameras.