The Lockdown: Lasershield - convenient, cost effective, potentially vulnerable

But if your locks will not adequately protect you, then what will? How about a portable alarm system that is affordably priced, a cinch to install, and virtually immune to the most common cause of false alarms (keypad entry errors), maybe something like the LaserShield. Still, the question arises: if a determined burglar can easily bypass this wireless system with some simple and abundant technology, is that too much of a risk to your home security?
The LaserShield system
LaserShield has developed a keypad-free consumer-level alarm system that allows a homeowner to install and make it operational in about five minutes with no tools, no skill, and little hassle. The systems are being sold through national distribution Circuit City and other outlets to a potential market that is estimated at forty million residents.
LaserShield's target buyers are low to middle income homeowners or renters who live in apartments, houses or locations where electronic protection is desired at a very affordable price and with absolutely no installation issues, and, preferably, without the need for professional installers. According to LaserShield, their customers want to protect their TVs, home audio systems, jewelry (and presumably other valuables) against attacks by the casual or opportunistic thief. Many buyers cannot afford a professionally-installed alarm system, nor does it make sense to invest in a wired system that cannot be removed when the renter moves residences. The company has even included the Spanish speaking segment of its market by programming voice prompts in both Spanish and English -- smart!
The LaserShield alarm system was designed as a cost-effective solution for a certain class of homeowners to provide additional basic security. When I interviewed Clint O'Connor, the chief architect of this product, we talked about who would use LaserShield and where and what was really required in such a system. I agree with the premise that a very high percentage of burglaries are committed by criminals with little to no sophistication. In such cases the primary function of an alarm system, any alarm system, is to detect an intrusion at the earliest possible moment and warn the burglar that if he sticks around he is likely to get caught because the police are coming.
As the design of this product took form, the company adopted a philosophy that it was not concerned with the more "sophisticated" attacks like the one we'll demonstrate here. The result was an alarm system that offers some very clever and sophisticated options, but may be subject to some very simple bypass techniques. So the question becomes one of security. What is sufficient for the intended LaserShield user? Will casual thieves avoid a house with a security sign in the front yard that advertises an alarm system? Or will such a sign be an invitation if they understand how a particular system can be circumvented?
Sure, the product will certainly do, in limited fashion, what a professionally-installed monitoring system accomplishes: detect the presence of an intruder, warn both the intruder and occupants, and send an immediate message to a central station alarm center so the police can be dispatched. But as it turns out, the motion sensor can be demonstrably bypassed by keying a transmitter -- in this case, a Motorola walkie talkie -- while walking through a space that is protected by a LaserShield system.
The prison boss in Cool Hand Luke said it best: "What we [may] have here is a failure to communicate." If a burglar walks into your house with an inexpensive two-way radio that is set to the LaserShield frequency, there will definitely be a failure of communications between the motion sensors and master alarm unit. If that occurs then nobody will be notified of an alarm condition and you will be at risk. The video demonstration of this hack is here. Note: the sensor in the background with its red light indicating that it is tripped, but the report is never received by the Master Alarm Unit while the walkie talkie is keyed.
My real problem is the trade-offs between convenience and security which had to be made by the engineers at LaserShield in order to offer this kind of a product. A simplistic system offers fewer options for which you pay less. A totally wireless system such as this one allows real ease of installation and placement of trips. The user voice prompts are clear and concise and warn of a variety of fault conditions, making it easy to arm and disarm with confidence. The system can literally be installed in five minutes without difficulty but there is a price to be paid for this convenience, and that is security. In my view it is not designed nor should be used for business applications.
So the bottom line is this: if you need a basic alarm system that is well made, inexpensive, easy to implement and will do a good job of detecting entry into your residence then the LaserShield will perform as advertised and will definitely provide the basic electronic security to the LaserShield target market. However, you must also be willing to accept the inherent risks of this type of system as described in our detailed report and accompanying videos. (See below.) If you think that you are a potential target of criminals and they might have the capability to acquire a UHF walkie-talkie to facilitate a burglary then the LaserShield is probably not for you.
Most common thieves just want to break in, steal what they can and leave. If they know there is an alarm or hear a siren they will probably retreat quickly. That is the purpose of any alarm system. In that regard, LaserShield may have broken new ground in providing a very user-friendly and reliable system. As to the jamming vulnerability, everyone needs to know about the possibility -- but at the end of the day a thief may also cut phone lines with the same effect.
Supplemental research
We further analyzed their hardware and software and produced a very detailed report as to our findings which can be found at in.security.org, together with a comprehensive video showing how the system works and how it can be defeated. (See also: video interview with Tony Dohrmann, CEO of LaserShield.) We asked one of their competitors (one of the largest alarm component manufacturers in the industry) if they too would analyze the LaserShield system in terms of hardware and functionality. They agreed and reported to us that this system was quite good, much to their surprise.
If you are contemplating the purchase of a burglar alarm system for your house, apartment, condo, dorm room, trailer, RV, boat or even a second house then you may want to invest the time to read the detailed report. Such a purchase should not be considered as trivial; we thought it was important to produce a comprehensive report so you could make an informed decision.
Alarm systems come in many different forms and offer an incredible array of options. Some are cheap and others are very expensive. Most are professionally installed and for good reason. Reliable detection of intrusion requires expertise in system setup, selection of sensors, and choice of monitoring services. The higher-end systems primarily rely on wired sensors rather than wireless and for good reason. Virtually all wireless sensors can be defeated by radio jamming, and is one of the well-kept secrets in the industry. So if you have a wireless system from ADT, GE, Honeywell (Ademco), Sentrol, Linear, Skylink, X10, ITI you may actually be at the same risk of bypass as the LaserShield.
The system you choose may eventually protect you, your family, and your possessions from theft, robbery, home invasion or vandalism so the decision is important and must be one that is based upon detailed information. Buying a security system is not like the purchase of an appliance, computer or other electronic gizmo; it literally can save your life so you need to make an informed choice.
Marc Weber Tobias is an investigative attorney and security specialist living in Sioux Falls, South Dakota. He represents and consults with lock manufacturers, government agencies and corporations in the U.S. and overseas regarding the design and bypass of locks and security systems. He has authored five police textbooks, including Locks, Safes, and Security, which is recognized as the primary reference for law enforcement and security professionals worldwide. The second edition, a 1400 page two-volume work, is utilized by criminal investigators, crime labs, locksmiths and those responsible for physical security. A ten-volume multimedia edition of his book is also available online. His website is security.org and his blog is in.security.org. Marc welcomes reader comments and email.





















Reader Comments (Page 1 of 1)
EskimoPie @ Jan 31st 2008 2:36PM
You mention "Previous Lockdown Articles"... curious, I clicked on the "lockdown" hyperlink to view all these previous articles... It only returns this article... why is that?
OneLove @ Jan 31st 2008 2:41PM
do a search and quit whining.
John Stracke @ Jan 31st 2008 2:41PM
The vulnerability here is not that they used wireless, but that they used very *crude* wireless. If they'd used a cheap Bluetooth chip, they would've made it much harder to crack. Not perfect, but harder.
Josh @ Jan 31st 2008 3:50PM
Not really. Bluetooth or any other transmission type wouldn't improve the system because the hack demonstrated involves simply putting out a strong transmission on the same frequency as the alarm so that the base unit can only hear the portable radio. Even with Bluetooth you could simply use the frequency for BT and jam it out so long as your transmitter is more powerful than the transmitters in the alarm sensors. The real fix would be something like my ADT alarm has. If a sensor is no longer reachable by the master panel then it trips the alarm. So in the case of my alarm at home you couldn't defeat it this way because making the master panel deaf to the sensors only makes the police show up :) It's kinda lame that this alarm system couldn't implement that simple enhancement to check and see if the sensors were reachable.
John Stracke @ Jan 31st 2008 3:55PM
"Even with Bluetooth you could simply use the frequency for BT and jam it out so long as your transmitter is more powerful than the transmitters in the alarm sensors." -- Yes, but it's a lot easier to find a walkie-talkie than something to swamp the entire 2.4GHz band. (If you don't cover the whole thing, it'll find an unused channel--that's what spread spectrum is for.)
Josh @ Jan 31st 2008 6:16PM
For $445 USD I can block Bluetooth...
http://gizmodo.com/gadgets/gadgets/wireless-jammer-114698.php
http://www.magnumtelecom.com/Pages/jammers.htm
John Stracke @ Jan 31st 2008 4:08PM
"For $445 USD I can block Bluetooth..." -- Fine, but that's a higher bar than this device is trying to block. Someone who's got $445 to invest in their criminal career is not a casual, opportunistic thief.
Dom @ Jan 31st 2008 2:51PM
Just for the record, when the Captain of Road Prison 36 said it, the line was "...failure to communicate!" not "...a failure..." :)
Stephan @ Jan 31st 2008 3:22PM
Jeez such a long article for such an easy answer
DOG
Not one of those little yappers a real dog, a German Shepard(mix) can easily be found in the pound and you get a great companion! I have three dogs so I am a bit crazy, but let me tell you I can leave the house wide open and no robber is coming near me.
Scott @ Jan 31st 2008 4:18PM
Really? Are you dogs both bullet/knife proof? A dog will stop casual burglars, but certainly not those who are determined.
Some quick research:
"In another study, the following question was asked of 589 convicted property offenders:
How effective is each of the following likely to be in preventing burglary, breaking and entering and grand theft?
0 - not effective 1 - somewhat effective 2 - very effective
Monitored burglar alarms[8] 1.51
Electronic sensors in windows 1.35
Closed circuit TV cameras in stores 1.31
Private security patrols 1.14
***DOG IN HOUSE 1.11***
Weapons in home 1.10
Guardhouses protecting homes 1.07
Random police foot patrols 1.05
Better exterior lighting 1.02
"Neighborhood Watch" programs 0.98
Safes/strong boxes 0.83
Local burglar alarms 0.83
Deadbolt lock 0.79
Timed interior lights 0.78[9]"
Stephan @ Jan 31st 2008 4:35PM
Yes but a dog can, and in many examples has, taken a bullet/knife for their owner (in the news all the time) the monitered alarm, will just call the cops to come find my body. It would crush me to have one of my dogs killed, but better than me or wife or daughter.
Cru Jones @ Jan 31st 2008 3:46PM
If I were to purchase the LaserShield system, I wouldn't advertise it with their stickers and yard signs. That's when you invite the thief to come in with his cheap walkie-talkie and defeat the sensors. If you don't advertise what kind of system you have, the chances of your early detection working and getting the police on the way are much better. Honestly, what criminal would carry a walkie-talkie with him/her into a home invasion unless he/she knew there was a LaserShield installed because of the huge signs and stickers outside the house.
Jarhead2012 @ Jan 31st 2008 4:11PM
That's why you advertise a DIFFERENT type of security system outside of your house. They break in trying to use the methods to foil the specific type of system and...OOPS! They used the wrong method because you advertised a different one! (just thought of that. I'm sure there are a few errors here, though)
FThorn @ Jan 31st 2008 3:58PM
"But if your locks will not adequately protect you, then what will?"
US Constitution, two amendments in.
Kai Cherry @ Jan 31st 2008 4:20PM
*High Five!*
Scott @ Jan 31st 2008 4:21PM
See above research. That's somewhat effective, but even less so than having a dog, and much less than having a monitored alarm.
I guess you get to feel like John Wayne though.
Rob @ Jan 31st 2008 4:43PM
My point exactly. Nothing a Desert Eagle can't handle.
neil @ Feb 4th 2008 1:01PM
you are more likely to harm yourself or your family with a gun than stop an intruder. but hey, to each their own.
Josh @ Jan 31st 2008 6:23PM
"Fine, but that's a higher bar than this device is trying to block. Someone who's got $445 to invest in their criminal career is not a casual, opportunistic thief."
How cheap do you think a Motorola radio + programming cable and software is? Plus you probably want a 5watt model instead of a 1watt to ensure that you overpower the transmitters. I imagine you would easily pay $400+ for that. The demonstration in the video is something a career criminal would do. How would a casual thief know to look in to the frequency used and get a radio and program it to that and then use it to break in to your house?
instant rice @ Jan 31st 2008 6:25PM
i used to sell lasershield at compusa. we received training on them. it's the most ridiculously easy to disarm security system ever. they have a mute button on them that will shut them up for 30 seconds, which is long enough to smash them and rip out the speaker, or toss them into a toilet tank if you need to be stealthy.
oofus @ Feb 1st 2008 11:12AM
I was the buyer at Circuit City for this product... the CompUSA salesperson has no idea what he is talking about.... There is no mute button... There is a bypass button but that can only be activated before the unit is armed... Once armed, the unit is hidden from site and is not accessible by a burglar... It can send a signal via POTS, high-speed internet, or GSM connection... With the GSM adapter, there is not need to even worry about cut phone lines... I guess that is why CompUSA went out of business.... Their sales people do not know any thing.... Good luck at McDonalds, instant rice....
Old Guy @ Feb 1st 2008 11:00PM
I have owned and used a Lasershield system for more than a year - and I've been very happy with it. Here's what I went through.
I almost bought an ADT system, and I'm glad I didn't. I replied to one of those ADT postcards that says it cost less than $100, and it would be installed for me. A sales guy showed up, and by the time he was through, he had me convinced that I needed a $1800 system or I wouldn't be safe. And I had to lock in to a 2 year contract for about $40 per month. I have to admit, the guy was a good salesman. But when the installer showed up (10 days later), I was having buyers remorse. And the installer looked like he had just been released from prison - tattoos all over his arms, etc. I got the feeling that he installed alarms by day and broke into houses by night. I called the ADT sales guy and cancelled on the spot.
I'd heard an ad for Lasershield on the radio, so I went out and bought one. I have to agree with the author of this article - this was really easy to set up and install. I was mentally prepared for an afternoon of frustration and calls to customer support. It honestly took less than ten minutes to set up. I tested it, and an alarm went off that made me want to get out of the house. I took about ten more minutes to sign up for monitoring (I did it online - not using the paper form that came in the box). After you sign up for monitoring, you have to test it by pushing the panic button. The siren went off. a call came about 20 seconds later. I answered the call, entered the password, and bingo! I had a monitored alarm system in my house. It took about 10 seconds to teach my wife how to use it. If you can use your car alarm, you can use this. Honestly, my thought was "Why didn't somebody come up with this about 20 years ago?
The cost for the hardware was about one-tenth what ADT had racked up on me, and the monthly fees are about half of what ADT was going to charge. And I feel really safe. I suppose the author of this article has a valid point - he seems to be pretty knowledgeable - but I just don't imagine people in my neighborhood walking around with walkie talkies trying to break into houses. There have been a few burglaries in my neighborhood in the past two years - but it's just been punks taking advantage of an unlocked front door, and running in and grabbing something.
I suppose the author has a valid point, but I guess that every alarm system out there has weaknesses that professional thieves can take advantage of. I'm not trying to protect Fort Knox. I'm trying to keep the punks from grabbing my home theater or my laptop. Now I arm the system every time I leave the house - even if it's just to walk the dog. Sorry if I sound like a salesperson or something, but after _almost_ buying from ADt, and then the experience I had with Lasershield, I really like this product. I feel very safe with it. And my home owner's insurance went down by $80 per year. In a few years, that will pay for the system. (BTW, after I set it up, I bought two more of the motion detectors to guard my back door and garage door. Now that I knew how to do it, it took about one minute to set up each one.)
bcope01 @ Feb 5th 2008 10:13PM
I read somewhere that all one needs to do it take the phone off the hook upon entering the house and that defeats the response call. Sound right?
Ruby @ Feb 6th 2008 4:41PM
It depends on which phone. And if you have the high speed connection the connection is supervised and messing with phones won’t work. But you need to use an UPS system. A burglar never knows what your configuration is. If you have LaserShield’s GSM solution it’s pretty much bullet proof against a burglar circumventing the system if you hide the main box under a bed or out of sight. I own one and it’s very fast at communicating it’s signals. Once the signal gets out who cares what they do to the alarm. It’s too late.
Old Guy @ Feb 13th 2008 5:42AM
I just have the basic Lasershield system. I suppose that if a burglar could get to the phone and get it off-hook before the system sends a message to the monitoring service, then he would probably prevent the message from going out. But at the same time, the siren is blasting - probably driving him nuts. A professional thief might try to get the phone off hook - but I don't think I'm a target for professional thieves. I have the average things you'd find in an average house in an average American neighborhood. The Ocean's 11 team isn't going to target my house, and I feel pretty confident that this system will protect me from random casual thieves. Maybe it's not perfect, but heck - nothings perfect. When I look at the protection I get vs. how low-cost and simple it was to buy and set up, I think this system offers good bang for the buck. If you have bars of gold on your living room table, don't get this system. If you're just an average person, I think it's pretty good.
Padre @ Feb 21st 2008 11:21PM
I was a bit bemused by the idea that anyone would even consider putying up a sign informing thieves about the exact sort of alarm system being used-- maybe it's just to ensure that only high-class thieves that can afford powerful 2-way radios would break into your home (I mean, does anyone say, "I wouldn't want any of that low-class trash robbing me-- I want only upper-class badguys!"?)
The research about what thieves avoid is interesting, especially since "monitored burglar alarms" is at the very top, way above "weapons in home" (of course, the study only included robbers who had been caught-- we don't know about the more skilled or lucky ones)). Given that fact, the LaserShield does seem like an inexpensive way of keeping at least a large percentage of thieves from robbing your house.
Of course, the only way that a monitored alarm will deter burglars from trying to break into your house is if you have a sign or stickers saying that you have a monitored system (the signs needn't specify which system, to avoid 2-way radios). Given the research cited, there's something even cheaper than the LaserShield, though.
Just put up some nice, professional-looking 'monitored alarm' warning signs, and if you want to get fancy maybe a little box with a battery-powered flashing red LED that can be seen through a window. It'll cost you maybe $20. The amateurs will hit your neighbor's house instead (why risk the monitored alarm?)-- the real pros will get through any alarm you've got, if they want to badly enough, or else go in (ignoring the siren), grab the computer and wide-screen TV, and be gone before the cops get there anyway.
As long as we're only keeping out the amateurs, the teenages punks, and the whacked-out looking for something to pawn for drugs, the plain sign seems as effective as anything else, and is certainly the cheapest way to go!