IP Camera - 15 Year Shootout

In reply to Undisclosed Manufacturer #1

Interesting read. I remember thinking the 210 was pretty darn nifty back in the day.

I'm just glad this isn't a review of my performance capabilities over the past 15 years!

Reactions:

(2)

(10)

Max Shumeyko

•May 25, 2017

I loved AXIS 210!

I had plenty of similar cameras 10 years ago and 210 seemed as a quite reliable and decent camera. But we used it with a frame based MJPEG compression. MPEG4 looked like a bad choice for video surveillance these days.

Reactions:

Jack Sink

IPVMU Certified

Thank you for making me feel very old, Ethan. I remember the Axis 210 and thinking they were up against really strong competitors, e.g. Panasonic, Pelco etc.

Reactions:

(2)

Mike Dotson

Formerly of Seneca • IPVMU Certified

Ethan, what were the settings for the Zipstream effort and GOV on the Q1615?

Reactions:

Ethan Ace

In reply to Mike Dotson

Zipstream Extreme, GOV set to max.

Reactions:

Undisclosed #2

IPVMU Certified

Reactions:

(1)

Undisclosed #3

I'm curious which digital signal processors each of these cameras use?

Reactions:

(1)

Undisclosed #4

I've got an almost 10yr old 209 Axis cam and that thing still performs better than some of the value HIK cameras.

Reactions:

(2)

John Honovich

In reply to Undisclosed #4

IPVM

almost 10yr old 209 Axis cam and that thing still performs better than some of the value HIK cameras.

In what way? I find that hard to believe. The Hikvision cameras have modern sensors with better WDR, integrated IR standard, smart codec standard, etc. (and that can generally be said about many 2017 cameras).

Reactions:

(2)

(1)

Undisclosed #4

In reply to John Honovich

A. No back doors, not Chinese owned.

B. Me partly being facetious.

But, seriously that 209MFD is solid. I know it's my environment and camera location, but the 209 has a better picture at night due to more natural light. My demo Hik has a bad IR ' ring of fire'.

But yes, I'm sure the newer cameras are better no matter who the manufacture is.

Fun comparison article! The bandwidth is the crazy thing. Way better picture with WAY less bandwidth.

Reactions:

(1)

Jon Dillabaugh

In reply to Undisclosed #4

Pro Focus LLC

https://ipvm.com/reports/axis-critical

https://ipvm.com/reports/axis-google-vuln

https://ipvm.com/reports/axis-root-pass-change

https://ipvm.com/reports/axis-exploit

https://ipvm.com/reports/axis-orwelllabs

Yep, they are safe for sure.... /eyeroll/

Reactions:

(2)

(1)

(2)

Ross Vander Klok

In reply to Jon Dillabaugh

IPVMU Certified

Whoa whoa whoa! I think we all know IPVM only reports on Hikvision issues so I can only conclude these links are fictitious. Possible planted by Russian and/or Chinese spies? Only a full congressional investigation will tell.

Reactions:

(14)

Undisclosed End User #8

In reply to Jon Dillabaugh

Well when you have as much market share as Axis you are #1 target for exploits. You need to change the filter you use to look at this, Axis may get exploited more often but their Cyber Security Program is one of the best if not best in the industry PERIOD! They set the bar very high, yes their products may cost a bit more but you get all of the value their solutions offer including robust Cyber Security and ACAP Integrations far more than anyone else offers. Also imagine a world where all manufactures use one version of firmware for the entire product line, that makes patching a breeze when you need to push an update.

I prefer a manufacturer who is responsive and open with the exploits/notifications versus one that still believes is Security by Obscurity.

NOTICE: This comment has been moved to its own discussion: Does Axis Have The Best Cyber Security Program?

Reactions:

(2)

Undisclosed #3

In reply to Undisclosed End User #8

signed,

Martin Gren's Mom

Reactions:

(1)

(2)

Undisclosed Manufacturer #10

•Aug 13, 2018

In reply to Undisclosed #3

lol that is definitely an Axis-centric response.

Reactions:

bashis mcw

In reply to Undisclosed End User #8

Agree

Reactions:

(1)

Undisclosed Manufacturer #9

In reply to Undisclosed End User #8

I love that you brought up ACAP. One of their exploits was using the ACAP system. Also they don't sandbox applications - they can have full root access which can be exploited

Reactions:

(1)

bashis mcw

In reply to Undisclosed Manufacturer #9

Cool, which of them was using ACAP?

Reactions:

Undisclosed Manufacturer #9

In reply to bashis mcw

I will have to dig to figure out which one it was. It wasn't a malicious ACAP app, rather a vulnerability in the ACAP system that allowed escalated privileges.

Reactions:

Undisclosed Manufacturer #9

https://ipvm.com/reports/axis-orwelllabs

In reply to bashis mcw

Here it is (Thanks Jon Dillabaugh for consolidating it for me):

The exploit occurs from the ACAP / camera application section of the Axis camera web interface.
ACAP, where this exploit was found, is reported by multiple Axis application partners as exposing risks. Partners say that Axis does not appropriately sandbox applications (think apps on an iPhone) and that this could result in badly behaving apps creating performance problems or inserting malware.

Reactions:

(1)

bashis mcw

In reply to Undisclosed Manufacturer #9

Ah, remember that one

You have to login as root to execute this exploit, which mostly defeats the danger of the exploit.

No need to exploit if you already logged in as root, yes?

Reactions:

(1)

bashis mcw

In reply to Undisclosed Manufacturer #9

However, FYI, I just posted one old and forgotten exploit for Axis from August 2016 (fixed by Axis in Q3/2016), nothing special as of today, but I notify you so you don't think I'll defend Axis.

https://github.com/mcw0/PoC/blob/master/Axis%20SSI%20RCE

Reactions:

Hans Kahler

Eagle Eye Networks

I liked the WDR comparison, I think it's a good way to illustrate the challenge and the different solutions.

Reactions:

(3)

Undisclosed Integrator #5

What would be an interesting study/test, but it would probably be cumbersome is as you test cameras, leave them plugged in and running and see how they perform over time (years).

This would be interesting to see because I think some cameras just "spoil" after time, like geovision cameras, their varifocal cameras tend to get out of focus or degrade after 6 months to a year.

Almost like how car manufacturers put their cars on the treadmills to test them 1mil miles.

Reactions:

(1)

Samuel Rodgers

In reply to Undisclosed Integrator #5

I'd be interested to see a survey of how often cameras are replaced these days. I see one was done back in 2012, wonder if lifespan has shortened at all

It would seem from this test 5 years is a good lifespan based on how quickly the technology moves; you'll get better image quality/WDR and save on storage costs, and with wide FOV/higher resolution you may be able to remove some redundant cameras and save licenses. We've done that for select cameras in public spaces/areas where WDR and increased image quality is a huge benefit.

On the flip side we also have cameras going on 6-7 years located in non-challenging environments where we can't justify replacing a still-functioning unit and benefits would be smaller.

Reactions:

(1)

Ross Vander Klok

In reply to Samuel Rodgers

IPVMU Certified

We only change our cameras out when they die. Well I guess we did swap out some 2100's five or six years ago because IT got sick of the bandwidth, but anything that has Mpeg-4 or above we will use until it dies. Are there better options available? Of course. Are those options free? Of course not.

Budget plays the largest role for us and I would think that is the case for most non-government end users, but I could be wrong on that.

Reactions:

(1)

Roger Yarrow

How fun .... I have an Axis 2100, 2120, and 200+ sitting on my camera display case right here next to me!

Reactions:

Undisclosed Integrator #6