8 ms·
I'm glad to see UBNT in this space. I've always used ZFS because it's vastly superior to other options. When I see storage companies building without fault to
by elevation 4mo ago
I'm glad to see UBNT in this space.
I've always used ZFS because it's vastly superior to other options. When I see storage companies building without fault tolerance, or without a merkle tree (so that you can backup deltas efficiently without having to recompute them) it's a sign their marketing team has more influence over the company than their engineers.
Sadly, the few ZFS COTS options have been somewhat underpowered. QNAP supports ZFS filesystems, but their backup configuration won't let you arrange for a nas to pull from the source (instead of the source doing a push.) You can still pull it off by scheduling your own cron job, but this somewhat defeats the purpose of paying extra for a vendor solution.
UBNT is still supporting my 15 year old edgerouters with security updates, and their interface is clean and usable for anyone with basic network experience. And their video surveillance solutions are unusual in that they allow you to keep your footage entirely onsite and offline, an uncommon level of privacy. If they can bring the same polish to their storage solutions, I'll be using these new products for a long time.
- sussexby 4mo agoThe same is true for our AI processing on the cameras. This is entirely local and private. You can even air gap the UniFi Protect system from the Internet and it'll operate fine.
- eptcyka 4mo agoCan I use it without running some inane management VM?
- Avicebron 4mo agoGenuine question, if you're running unifi, why don't you want the management vm? Synology makes a decent NAS without the controller.
- eptcyka 4mo agoI like the hardware, cannot stand needing to run another machine just for management.
- linohh 4mo agoIf you get one of the Cloud devices, you won't need to, as they bring their own.
- InTheArena 4mo agoSynology hardware stopped being decent a while ago.
- pinewurst 4mo agoPlus their drive type restrictions which are poison in a cost-sensitive NAS. (Seemingly rolled back recently, but a roll back can be easily rolled back itself. I don't trust them enough to count on that not happening.)
- lostlogin 4mo agoThe UDM runs mine, but prior to that I ran a Docker container with it. It worked well. https://hub.docker.com/r/linuxserver/unifi-controller https://hub.docker.com/r/linuxserver/unifi-controller
- _rs 4mo agoYou can't run UniFi Protect like this, only the network controller
- deleted 4mo ago[deleted]
- jon-wood 4mo agoUnifi gateways run the management software now, typically they'll also be your networks router and so something you'll need to buy anyway, but if you just want to use the security/wifi elements then you can either run it in a container or if you're really determined not to run a container and not to buy a router there's the CloudKey.
- infecto 4mo agoThe cost is just insane though. $4-$500 for a camera that I can get equivalent specs for $50-100.
- projektfu 4mo agoThey're not all $500, some are $150-300. Overall price comparable to Honeywell, but more than, say, Lorex.
- throwaway219450 4mo agoAll the basic G6 cameras are in the $200 range and have edge compute? What's the comparison at $50-100?
- 9x39 4mo agoWith face detection? License plates? Tamper protection? I'm guessing you're thinking Reolink or other Chinese ultra-commodity cam. It's fine, it's just in a different product class and ecosystem - and that's where enterprises fit in, they want that support+ecosystem and not DIYing. Reolink CX820 8MP $129 https://reolink.com/product/cx820/ https://reolink.com/product/cx820/ Unifi G6 8MP ~$300 https://techspecs.ui.com/unifi/physical-security/uvc-g6-dome?s=us https://techspecs.ui.com/unifi/physical-security/uvc-g6-dome... Avigilon H6A 8MP ~$1200 https://www.avigilon.com/security-cameras/h6a-dome https://www.avigilon.com/security-cameras/h6a-dome
- infecto 4mo agoI never really thought of Ubiquity as enterprise always felt more of the premium small to mid sized business but I am sure some enterprises use them.
- 9x39 4mo agoThe new enterprise NVRs work pretty well. I think they're definitely not Avigilon, Genetec, Verkada, but we run a few hundred UI cams in some edge areas. It works, esp if you don't demand orchestration.
- 4mo ago
- throwaway219450 4mo agoI do like the onboard AI, and it works well for entity detection (like people). We haven't found the face detection to be very reliable in outdoor security applications. There doesn't seem to be a way to correct/combine classes if someone's detected as multiple individuals on different occasions, so we end up with the same person detected as 5 "unknown"s. This is not a hard problem to solve. You'd just allow embedding matching to different face groups, but it's annoying as a user.
- dmoose 4mo ago> This is entirely local and private. You can even air gap the UniFi Protect system from the Internet and it'll operate fine. One week ago 3 guys broke into my shop while I was traveling. They had sense enough to power down the starlink that was providing internet which would have taken out all of the remote camera options. They did not realize that almost everything they were doing was being recorded via the unifi system. In the end about the only thing of value left in the building was the hard drive with all of their pictures on it. The police have used the footage to identify all of them and it will be pretty open and shut when they see a court room. Offline and air gapped the whole time they were there but did exactly what it was installed to do.
- electriclove 4mo agoHow did you hide it so that the thieves didn't find it?
- iluvcommunism 4mo ago[dead]
- dmoose 4mo agoA 7U cabinet in an overhead space that is difficult to access. Installation and configuration were a bit of a headache but ended up being worth it. There was a NAS in the office and they stripped 7 drives, sleds and all, out of it. I'm guessing with such an obvious endpoint for the camera storage it never occurred to anyone there was a second box. I had something like this in mind when I wired the building. It seemed like a good idea to make onsite security footage much harder to find given the cameras were obvious and anyone breaking in would probably look to damage or destroy the system. I really thought the cameras themselves were the deterrent, but these guys gave it a shot anyway. Cutting the cable to the starlink and walking off with the NAS drives seemed to be the plan. In the future I'm going to add a local battery backed alarm connected to external siren and strobe that is immediate on opening the office door to draw attention. I was driving down to WWDC when the starlink went offline and saw the notice on my phone but wrote it off to equipment failure which gave them enough time to clean the place out pretty well. The hole in my strategy was thinking nothing could happen without notification, but being in a car in the middle of Norther CA with spotty cell coverage and lots of distractions blew that up pretty hard. I'm also thinking one of ubiquiti's cellular backups is in my future. Starlink offline is annoying but not the attention grabber that a still of a guy walking in the door would have been. Cellular backup would have gotten me that.
- ssl-3 4mo agoThe processing can happen within the camera, and it's nice when it does...but that doesn't mean that the only other option is something cloud-based, like some might assume. Open-source NVR software like Frigate can do things like the object-detection/license plate/face recognition game on local hardware, with the cheapest available IP cameras. It's just a program that runs on a computer with a network and some storage and some processing ability like a GPU. Those cheap cameras don't have to be trusted; with things like VLANs, they can hang out on the Group W bench where they have no access to anything important or the outside world. :) (But yeah, it does represent much more of a DIY effort than something from UBNT does.)
- radicalbyte 4mo agoI've been so impressed with Ubiquiti that I've decided to target FreeBSD for my current side project. Their camera system is wonderful. Their DreamMachine is a massive upgrade for my home network. Their APs are rock solid, no hassle, just work, and it integrates so well. I have my work / home on different subnets. I have the kids on a different subnet and behind a firewall providing some protection against ads. Very happy customer here.
- ksec 4mo ago>I've been so impressed with Ubiquiti that I've decided to target FreeBSD for my current side project. As much as I wish Ubnt are using BSD in their product, which they are not. I am understanding how FreeBSD relates here.
- radicalbyte 4mo agoAn assumption, I made. Failed, it was.
- br0ceph 4mo agoI always advise ppl against ubiquiti devices. They are not open at all, its yet another proprietary router/switch/wifi/nas/etc
- lostapathy 4mo agoSo what do you actually recommend?
- psd1 4mo agoI like unifi despite the appliance feel. I recommend using the kit that works fire you, but avoiding the temptation to stick everything in a single pane of glass. Use the wifi, don't also cram your routing and switching and firewalling into the same vendor relationship. It's like being apple-everything. Freedom until you bump into the walls of your cell. Unifi APs are a sweet spot of price/performance, and I have no difficulty recommending them. Ruckus hardware is better at five times the price. UISP gear has worked very very well for me for ptp and ptmp. But that's a completely different line.
- johne20 4mo agoAny way to get Protect iOS notifications if using local mode only? Eg, using local local login but away from home.
- MrDrMcCoy 4mo agoI am unable to accept that it is fully local, since you have to bind your network to their cloud just to accept the EULA. [0] I have 0% trust that a subsequent unbind truly severs the link, because this is such a shady thing to require in the first place. [0] https://community.ui.com/questions/e3d50641-5c00-4607-9723-453cda557e35?replyId=725fe892-d8d4-435d-b5be-738d3684be95 https://community.ui.com/questions/e3d50641-5c00-4607-9723-4...
- varenc 4mo agoI'm surprised this is required. Agreed that's shady. I wonder what their reasoning is. But if you don't trust it, the fix is easy: just deny the Ubiquiti cameras and controller all internet access. That way no trust is required.
- mcculley 4mo agoBut what if I want to access my cameras remotely but not have their manufacturer access them?
- avianlyric 4mo agoVPN. You can even use the Wireguard VPN that all Ubiquiti routers have built in
- npodbielski 4mo agoI am running nginx proxy on my public IP on top of ubiquiti UNVR it works via headscale. But honestly I am super happy with their hardware and software but necessity to link your network to their cloud just be able to use 100% of features of my own hardware, make me want to sell the whole thing and buy something else.
- ragall 4mo agoSo once you accept the EULA, it's fully local. What's your problem with that ?
- 4mo ago
- jonah 4mo agoHey, why can't I get full-resolution 4k snapshots off my G5 Pro bullet?
- ahknight 4mo agoNow if only Ubiquiti could solve the problem where everything is always out of stock.
- vladvasiliu 4mo ago> QNAP supports ZFS filesystems Do they have ecc on those models? Do you have an example model on hand?
- jfim 4mo agoSome do. I got the TS-873A a few years back, it works. Their software is kind of weird, and I wouldn't connect it to their cloud offering, but it does work.
- scheme271 4mo agoECC support depends on the processors that the NAS uses. A few of their NASes allow you to use ECC memory but you'd need to swap the memory installed to ECC memory. A lot of their systems use Intel cpus that don't support ECC at all so you need to carefully pick and choose.
- broknbottle 4mo agoSome of them use arm based CPUs from Amazon’s Annapurna Labs.
- throwaway240403 4mo agoDon't buy a QNAP if you care about real ZFS. https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=48593360 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=48593360
- vladvasiliu 4mo ago> You can not take a zpool out of a QNAP system and access it on another system with ZFS. Too bad... I always wonder why companies do this...
- stavros 4mo agoWhat's UBNT?
- atombender 4mo agoStock symbol for Ubquiti, the company being discussed.
- stavros 4mo agoThanks. I wish people could just say the company name instead of using random aliases, but I guess it's some sort of cultural thing.
- neogodless 4mo agoI think using "poorly known" initialisms is almost always a "I'm in the in group" signaling. Or just making assumptions about what "everyone" knows. Either way it tends to be a net negative for a large percentage of the audience. Whether the individuals writing care about the ignorant among the audience determines if they put any effort into being educational or just signaling.
- kllrnohj 4mo agoThe stock symbol for Ubiquiti is actually UI, not UBNT. UBNT was the symbol for the old name that hasn't been used since 2019. I have no idea why changing the name also changed the stock symbol, but shrug
- ssl-3 4mo agoThanks, I think. I usually write UBNT because it's distinct and spelling out "Ubiquiti" hurts my soul in ways that I find difficult to properly articulate. But UI just seems so ambiguous. :)
- dsr_ 4mo agoShorter tickers are considered more valuable, because they are easier to say, type and remember. A is for Agilent. C is for Citigroup. T for AT&T, the Telephone Company.
- throwaway240403 4mo agoQNAP unforgivably uses a proprietary version of ZFS with their own extensions that are not compatible with mainline OpenZFS. It can only zfs send/receive to other QNAP devices. While your data is protected like any other ZFS system, it is _NOT_ interoperable. You can not take a zpool out of a QNAP system and access it on another system with ZFS. I discovered this painfully the hard way, and won't buy from them again, unless I plan to wipe the software and run something open.
- lazide 4mo agoAmusingly, most of my old qnap hardware ran Ubuntu pretty well
- scheme271 4mo agoI think the ZFS changes were due to needing a way to allow qnap systems to expand zfs pools. The raidz expansion features in openzfs probably took too long for qnap to wait.
- infogulch 4mo agoOpenZFS released the zpool expansion as stable last year. Hopefully QNAP is charting a path to allow their users to migrate from their fork to OpenZFS, though of course these kinds of things take time to develop. I would be really worried if they are diverging further from OpenZFS rather than converging.
- rincebrain 4mo agoLast I looked at their releases of code, they had branched from ZFS before it became OpenZFS, and had a lot of proprietary extensions beyond just the reshaping (from memory, they implemented encryption differently, as one example, and I think they had one or two checksums that I assume were because something they shipped had hardware support for it?) so I wouldn't hold out hope that their goal is to rebase on OpenZFS unless they announce something to that effect.
- 4mo ago