Network connection to a remote device begins by considering the type of cable. In some cases, installed cable may already be present and available for reuse, or you may have the option to install a new cable. Let’s review the major types of cable used for most security applications, their advantages and disadvantages.

Types of cables

In general, there are four major types of cable. First is coaxial cable, which, given the many decades of analogue systems, has hundreds of thousands of existing connections. The second type includes Cat 5e and Cat 6, or what is commonly called Ethernet cable, the standard for network connections. The third is single pair cable, consisting of two wires and commonly used for alarm and access control applications. Finally, there is fibre, mostly used for long distances and outdoor applications.

Coaxial cable, given the many
decades of analogue systems,
has hundreds of thousands of
existing connections

Cat 5e and 6 are used for networking connections. The cable consists of eight wires, commonly referred to as four pairs. Under the IP transmission and PoE standards, two pair, four wires, are used. Each of the sets are referred to as “A” or “B”. The standard requires that IP/PoE devices operate over either. Within the “A” or “B,” one pair is used for data while the second pair for PoE transmission.

Advantages of using multiple wires

The use of multiple wires has advantages for network transmission. Running cables in parallel reduces resistance to power transmission. Cable twists are standard in Cat cable. Twisting reduces noise as the twist cancels out noise-causing resistance. The size of the wire is also standard at what is known as 24 AWG. 

The standardisation of Cat cable serves as the basis of IP transmission in determining its limit at 328 feet (100 metres). This also applies to resulting power delivered to a device powered by PoE. Starting with a source of 15.4 watts (802.3af- Class 3), after 328 feet, the resulting power is 12.95 watts. For 30 watts (802.3at-Class 4), the resulting power is 25.5 watts. Other than Cat cable, no other type of cable can be used for IP/PoE without the use of a media convertor. 

The use of Cat cabling also allows transmitting PoE power higher than the current 802.3at source limit of 30 watts. Security camera manufacturers have developed video surveillance cameras with the ability to receive PoE on two wire pairs (rather than one pair) to what is in effect 802.3at. Given the highest voltage used for 30 watts which is 57 volts, up to 37 watts can be safely transmitted on a single pair and up to 74 watts using two pairs. This has given rise to the “60 watt PoE Cameras.” As two pairs are required, this application is restricted to Cat cables.

Fibre transmission will require local power sources and power supplies
Fibre transmission method is the most extensive, requiring extra equipment for transmission and reception

Power handling capacity

Keeping power in mind, one concludes that both coax and single pair will have much less power-handling capacity than Cat cable given that they are both single-pair transmission media. This means that both the signal and the power are carried over the same cable runs. There are several other important considerations for each.

Keeping power in mind, one
concludes
that both coax and
single pair will have
much less
power-handling capacity
than
Cat cable

With regard to coax: While Cat cable is used to set a fixed resistance yielding the resulting power and fixed bandwidth over 328 feet, 100 metres, coax has no such standards as applied to IP/PoE transmission. In general, taken over 1,000 feet, Cat 5e resistance is about 22-27 ohms. For coax to have similar results as Cat 5e, it would need the same resistance values. However, that isn’t the case. Coax resistance varies even within the same category of cable, such as the standard RG59. Differences in resistance will affect performance.

Noise rejection

Keep in mind that resistance Cat 5e cable also has standards with regard to the number and tightness of twists. These features affect noise cancellation within a cable. Single pair has no such standards and in fact can be found in flat wire configuration, which yields little or no noise rejection. Noise, in effect, is resistant to digital signals.

Finally, there is fibre. This transmission method is the most extensive, requiring extra equipment for transmission and reception. Its qualities include long transmission distance. Due to its glass structure, it is protected against lightning strikes and high power surges. The problem is, fibre doesn’t transmit PoE. Its use will require local power sources and power supplies. Fibre also has to be matched to be a completely matched system. The modems used must match the fibre, and there are several considerations based on single or multimode, and the transmission frequency.

Save

Save

Share with LinkedIn Share with Twitter Share with Facebook Share with Facebook
Download PDF version

Author profile

In case you missed it

What’s the next big thing in video image quality?
What’s the next big thing in video image quality?

Superior image quality has been the “holy grail” of the video surveillance business for several years. A transition to 4K images and a race to ever-higher pixel counts have dominated product development conversations for a while now. However, it’s now possible that the tide has turned. These days, data is sometimes more important than image quality, and increasing use of smaller-format mobile devices has helped to make image quality variations moot. As the industry changes, we asked this week’s Expert Panel Roundtable: What’s the next big thing in video image quality (beyond 4K and megapixel)?

How do agricultural security systems measure up against livestock theft?
How do agricultural security systems measure up against livestock theft?

“Some embark on farmyard heists whilst others are devoted to back-bedroom chicken sanctuaries,” a quote taken from Channel 4’s new documentary ‘How to Steal Pigs and Influence People’. Whilst many think this is part of the positive vegan uprising, The National Pig Association have expressed grave concern of the glamorisation and condoning of livestock theft from farms. Wesley Omar, who was featured in the documentary, was found guilty of theft after he broke into a farm and stole a pig stating "he was saving it from slaughter." Due to this ‘humane reasoning,’ he received a 12 month community order and completed 100 hours of unpaid work. However, the farmer in question incurred huge losses as he could not reclaim the pig due to potential contamination and had a cost of £6,000 to upgrade his security. The cost of rural crime Opportunistic thieves have now turned into organised criminals According to NFU Mutual, the cost of rural crime has risen by 12% since 2017, and the Home Office statistics stated that 26% of rural businesses experienced at least one crime incident in 2018. However, the face of rural crime is changing, with M.O.’s shifting. What once were opportunistic thieves have now turned into organised criminals stealing heavy machinery and livestock. One example saw around 200 sheep stolen in the last three months within the Wiltshire area alone. Due to the volume of these incidents, police speculated only skilled sheep rustlers could conduct this crime so efficiently and undisturbed. The result of this crime has cost the agricultural industry £3m in 2019 alone. However, theft isn’t the only emerging rural crime trend hitting these farmers. Fly tipping on private land has risen considerably over the past few years with figures constantly rising. Once again, like the face of rural theft, criminals are evolving. The Environment Agency has stated that organised gangs are making high profits through ‘waste removal’, undercutting legitimate waste management sites through fly tipping. This crime is affecting 67% of farms and landowners as criminals try to evade landfill taxes. But what happens when you’re the victim of this crime? According to Countryside Alliance, it is the only rural offence where landowners are legally responsible for the disposal of said waste, costing them around £47m each year. So, how can farmers and agricultural landowners protect their premises and assets from both animal rights activists and organised criminals? A scheme has been introduced within specific areas in order to curb the increasing rates of rural crime across England and Wales. Dedicated police teams have been created to provide protection and support to rural areas, with specialist knowledge in dealing with cases. Agricultural physical security How does the farming industry's physical security measure up against these criminals? With this in mind, how does the farming industry's physical security measure up against these criminals? How can they prevent these targeted attacks on their livelihoods? One area that should be considered is a line of defence that deters, detects and delays these intruders - rather than allowing them onto the land - whilst waiting for police to respond. Security measures nowadays are able to delay intrusions, being the difference between criminals getting away and getting caught. A physical fencing system with anti-cut and anti-climb features would offer the first line of defence to farmers and landowners by restricting access onto their fields. Alongside effective high security fencing systems, used to prevent livestock trailers entering farmers fields, entry points need to be reviewed and addressed on whether they are effectively deterring criminals. Many successful livestock thefts are due to organised criminals and their vehicles being able to access fields undetected. Improving the security of field perimeters and entry points is the first step in protecting a farmer's livelihood against criminals. In turn, having a single entry point in and out of fields and premises is also an effective deterrent. Properties with various exit plans are more likely to be targeted as criminals have a higher percentage of escaping. Access point security Security measures such as CCTV cameras or motion sensor lighting have quick installation times In order to increase security at field access points, blocking off the gateways to these fields would act as an extra deterrent to those looking to steal livestock and fly-tip. With perimeter and access point security comes additional physical security measures that could help prevent the theft of livestock. Security measures such as CCTV cameras or motion sensor lighting have quick installation times that help detect an intruder rather than deter and delay like perimeter security. With rural crime on the rise, livestock theft and other criminal activity is becoming a common occurrence for farmers and agricultural landowners. Rural crime is not only having detrimental effects on the individuals but also communities across the UK. Many other industries such as the commercial industry and sports sectors utilise effective physical security within their premises in order to protect their assets. And so we are asking; why is the agricultural industry any different?

Face recognition: Privacy concerns and social benefits
Face recognition: Privacy concerns and social benefits

News reports and opinion columns about face recognition are appearing everyday. To some of us, the term sounds overly intrusive. It even makes people shrink back into their seats or shake their head in disgust, picturing a present-day dystopia. Yet to others, face recognition presents technology-enabled realistic opportunities to fight, and win, the battle against crime. What are the facts about face recognition? Which side is right? Well, there is no definitive answer because, as with all powerful tools, it all depends on who uses it. Face recognition can, in fact, be used in an immoral or controversial manner. But, it can also be immensely beneficial in providing a safe and secure atmosphere for those in its presence.  Concerns of facial recognition With the increased facial recognition applications, people’s concerns over the technology continuously appear throughout news channels and social media. Some of the concerns include: Privacy: Alex Perry of Mashable sums up his and most other peoples’ privacy concerns with face recognition technology when he wrote, “The first and most obvious reason why people are unhappy about facial recognition is that it's unpleasant by nature. Increasing government surveillance has been a hot-button issue for many, many years, and tech like Amazon's Rekognition software is only making the dystopian future feel even more real”. Accuracy: People are worried about the possibilities of inaccurate face detection, which could result in wrongful identification or criminalisation. Awareness: Face recognition software allows the user to upload a picture of anyone, regardless of whether that person knows of it. An article posted on The Conversation states, “There is a lack of detailed and specific information as to how facial recognition is actually used. This means that we are not given the opportunity to consent to the recording, analysing and storing of our images in databases. By denying us the opportunity to consent, we are denied choice and control over the use of our own images” Debunking concerns  The concerns with privacy, accuracy, and awareness are all legitimate and valid concerns. However, let us look at the facts and examine the reasons why face recognition, like any other technology, can be responsibly used: Privacy concerns: Unlike the fictional dystopian future where every action, even in one’s own home, is monitored by a centralised authority, the reality is that face recognition technology only helps the security guard monitoring public locations where security cameras are installed. There is fundamentally no difference between a human security guard at the door and an AI-based software in terms of recognising people on watchlist and not recognising those who are not. The only difference is that the AI-based face recognition software can do so at a higher speed and without fatigue. Face recognition software only recognises faces that the user has put in the system, which is not every person on the planet, nor could it ever be. Accuracy concerns: It is true that first-generation face recognition systems have a large margin for error according to studies in 2014. However, as of 2020, the best face recognition systems are now around 99.8% accurate. New AI models are continuously being trained with larger, more relevant, more diverse and less biased datasets. The error margin found in face recognition software today is comparable to that of a person, and it will continue to decrease as we better understand the limitations, train increasingly better AI and deploy AI in more suitable settings. Awareness concerns: While not entirely comforting, the fact is that we are often being watched one way or another on a security camera. Informa showed that in 2014, 245 million cameras were active worldwide, this number jumped to 656 million in 2018 and is projected to nearly double in 2021. Security camera systems, like security guards, are local business and government’s precaution measures to minimise incidents such as shoplifting, car thefts, vandalism and violence. In other words, visitors to locations with security systems have tacitly agreed to the monitoring in exchange for using the service provided by those locations in safety, and visitors are indeed aware of the existence of security cameras. Face recognition software is only another layer of security, and anyone who is not a security threat is unlikely to be registered in the system without explicit consent. The benefits In August 2019, the NYPD used face recognition software to catch a rapist within 24 hours after the incident occurred. In April 2019, the Sichuan Provincial Public Security Department in China, found a 13-year-old girl using face recognition technology. The girl had gone missing in 2009, persuading many people that she would never be found again. Face recognition presents technology-enabled realistic opportunities to fight, and win, the battle against crimeIn the UK, the face recognition system helps Welsh police forces with the detection and prevention of crime. "For police it can help facilitate the identification process and it can reduce it to minutes and seconds," says Alexeis Garcia-Perez, a researcher on cybersecurity management at Coventry University. "They can identify someone in a short amount of time and in doing that they can minimise false arrests and other issues that the public will not see in a very positive way". In fact, nearly 60% Americans polled in 2019 accept the use of face recognition by law enforcement to enhance public safety. Forbes magazine states that “When people know they are being watched, they are less likely to commit crimes so the possibility of facial recognition technology being used could deter crime”. Saving time  One thing that all AI functions have been proven to achieve better results than manual security is speed. NBC News writes, “Nearly instantaneously, the program gives a list of potential matches loaded with information that can help him confirm the identity of the people he’s stopped - and whether they have any outstanding warrants. Previously, he’d have to let the person go or bring them in to be fingerprinted”. Facial recognition can also be immensely beneficial in providing a safe and secure atmosphere for those in its presence With AI, instead of spending hours or days to sift through terabytes of video data, the security staff can locate a suspect within seconds. This time-saving benefit is essential to the overall security of any institution, for in most security threat situations, time is of the utmost importance. Another way in which the technology saves time is its ability to enable employees (but not visitors) to open doors to their office in real time with no badge, alleviating the bottleneck of forgotten badge, keycode or password. Saving money A truly high-performance AI software helps save money in many ways. First, if the face recognition software works with your pre-existing camera system, there is no need to replace cameras, hence saving cost on infrastructure. Second, AI alleviates much of the required manual security monitoring 24/7, as the technology will detect people of interest and automatically and timely alert the authorities. Third, by enhancing access authentication, employees save time and can maximise productivity in more important processes. The takeaway AI-enabled face recognition technology has a lot of benefits if used correctly. Can it be abused? Yes, like all tools that mankind has made from antiquity. Should it be deployed? The evidence indicates that the many benefits of this complex feature outweigh the small chance for abuse of power. It is not only a step in the right direction for the security industry but also for the overall impact on daily lives. It helps to make the world a safer place.