I imagine the vast majority of shart meters have not been requested by the customer.
what is the truth about smart meters, no BS
- Thread starter ross94
- Start date
Sponsored Links
The WAN connection is GPRS via GSM. Its the equivilent of having a mobile phone in the meter cupboard.
The HAN connection is 2.4GHz 802.11g. Again, the equivilent of having a wireless access point in the meter cupboard.
I guarantee that she was already basking in plenty of RF transmissions before the smart meter went in
On another note, we moved into a property that had smart prepayment meters in it. We immediately got them switched to credit meters. The new supplier did it remotely but ballsed it up because they switched the electric first, which had the modem attached to it. The new supplier didn't support the meters in our property so once the switch happened they would 'revert' to standard meters. As soon as they did it they lost communication with the gas meter, which stayed in prepayment mode until we noticed when the credit ran out. (I was away for work, Wife at home with 3 kids) We had no way of topping it up. You can only get emergency credit when it has a connection to the network. I had to explain to the new supplier what they had done. I went through about 5 CSR's before someone understood what I was talking about. To be fair to her she got a meter person out within about 4 hours. He was confused because it didn't have a key or card slot to top up
He swapped it for a normal mechanical meter.
A few weeks on I started to notice strange problems on things connected to the 2.4GHz wireless network. Random disconnections and slow speeds.
I got the spectrum analyser out and found the source of the problems. The bloody smart meter modem
It was scanning the whole 2.4GHz band and beaconing at full power on every frequency looking for other smart devices/meters and the 'Smart Meter In Home Display'
So I decided that as this was no longer a 'smart meter' installation I didn't need the modem
One seal cut (on the modem, not the meter) and cable unplugged and the modem was dead. The 2.4GHz interference stopped. I logged it with Ofcom.
Interesting! I've seen a hidden wifi network SSID moving around and interferring with my wifi, it's probably my neighbour having a smart meter fitted on the other side of our party wall.
And yet people seem to think that using wifi to control their lighting, heating, kettles and willy-warmers is a brilliant idea.
Imagine the fun in high-density housing with people doing that, and everybody having a smart meter and at least one person switching suppliers at any given time.
Imagine the fun in high-density housing with people doing that, and everybody having a smart meter and at least one person switching suppliers at any given time.
Indeed. The standard speil is (anecdotally) that the supplier rings you up out of the blue and asks if you'd like this free meter that'll magically save you money blah blah. I actually got that from BG and took delight in (very politely) telling her that there were three reasons I didn't want them :
- They aren't free
- They are a massive security & privacy risk
- And you don't supply my gas and lecky - I'd switched supplier as soon as we moved in, and the switch happened a day or two before she rang.
My current supplier isn't even offering them at all (yet).
Doesn't need smart meters for fun with WiFi.
On another forum, I recall someone from (IIRC) Singapore complaining that standard menu based "select the WiFi to connect to" user interfaces just didn't work - with something like 1000 SSIDs visible, the list would refresh before he could scroll down to the one they wanted to select
And a good few years ago now, I recall reading about a study that found some densely populated areas were already to the point where only something like 5% of the bandwidth was available for actual traffic - with the other 95% being taken up by signalling. And that was well before WiFi was ubiquitous
Sponsored Links
How hard would it be for router code to be written with a default of not broadcasting the SSID?
How hard would it be so that a Smart Meter did not need to be changed if you swopped "suppliers"?
How hard would it be for Smart Meters to include a simple point of isolation, thus negating the need for the supply fuse to be removed?
How hard would it be for Smart Meters to include a simple point of isolation, thus negating the need for the supply fuse to be removed?
Not hard at all.
And my understanding is that that will be the situation in the future.
Once all the old smart meters have been swapped out for ones which don't need swapping out.
As BAS has said, I gather that is 'to come'. However, given how much time it is taking to 'roll out' the first phase of (not-too-smart) ones, I wonder how many of the people worrying about them now will still be around by the time a second phase (of replacing the first-phase meters) has been completed?
Technologically very easy, I would imagine. However, would you trust your life to isolation by a box which you knew was subject to all sorts of possible (and not necessarily all 'known') 'remote control'?
Mind you, a meter does not have to be smart for that. My daughter's (non-smart) meter has a built-in isolation switch (but no remote control!). I gather it's probably only SP, but at least as far as BS7671 is concerned, that should provide adequate isolation for her TN-C-S supply.
Kind Regards, John
Very easy - but they wouldn't sell !
Users expect to be able to pick the SSID from a list and just type the passcode, so telling them they have to go through some rigmarole of typing in the SSID as well and they'll tell you that the router is faulty.
Also, not broadcasting the SSID actually increases control traffic and reduces security/privacy. I know it sounds counter-intuitive but that is the case.
A client connected to a broadcasting SSID can passively listen for those broadcasts - so just the one router sending one packet periodically for use by all clients.
When a client has been connected to a non-broadcast (hidden) SSID it will periodically broadcast inquiry packets to see if there are any other access points with that SSID. That means every client periodically broadcasting inquiry packets for every hidden SSID it's ever been told to connect to - it has to inquire for all the hidden SSIDs as otherwise it wouldn't know if it had come within range of one of them. So not only is there more traffic, but your devices broadcast a list of hidden SSIDs they've been connected to - even when no-where near any of them (so a privacy issue as well).
https://blogs.technet.microsoft.com...-why-hidden-wireless-networks-are-a-bad-idea/
https://www.howtogeek.com/howto/286...hiding-your-wireless-ssid-really-more-secure/
And on reading those links, I see that a hidden SSID is actually contravening the 802.11 specs - but manufacturers include it because people demand it
The only time I hide the SSID is when I am setting up a point-point link, one AP, one client (in bridge mode), usually directional antennae, and the power turned down to what's needed for a reliable link with some headroom on the signal (to minimise interference with other users of the channel).
Indeed, it is "imminent" and I suspect they will start putting in SMETS2 meters quite soon. There are two components, well 3 actually, to getting this working :
- Meters installed with the right capability
- The communications network (and backend infrastructure such as the massive database) in place
- Connections between this comms system and the suppliers' systems
There has been some discussion on how to deal with existing meters. There has been talk of upgrading them with an OTA firmware upgrade, but I am rather sceptical of that. I suspect the hardware may not have the processing ability to handle the more secure encryption protocols, and if they can be upgraded with an OTA upgrade, then one has to think that there's an attack vector there for those who would like a go at it.
Similarly, if they can be upgraded by someone coming round with a laptop and plugging it in, then that too raises questions over security.
That does seem an eminently sensible feature and one has to wonder why it's not more common. As I type this, I'm waiting for the contractor working for my DNO to come and fit an isolator (and reseal the equipment). I'll post some pics later - the tails have an "interesting" arrangement, and there's a submain to a CU in the extension protected by just an RCD and the service fuse that I'm wanting to deal with. It's clear that while there's certificates for both CUs from qualified sparkys, there's been some DIY work that needs tidying up
And of course, no seal on the cutout - an old metal Henley one from the 1940s Funny you should say that...
http://www.policyconnect.org.uk/wsb...benefits-uses-assistive-living-and-healthcare
i wonder how that will work with more than one system with them seemingly unable to be monitored by one system
When they get themselves sorted out, all the "smart" meters will talk over one network to one central database - it's taken them a while to get this network and database up and running (government project, IT, late, over budget, buggy usually go together in one sentence). But the meters still being installed don't talk to it, they still use a variety of networks. Supposedly many of them can be upgraded - time will tell and if not then lots of almost new meters will need to be replaced with all the cost and inconvenience that entails.
On Monday I had an isolator installed, and it was interesting chatting with the guy doing the work - a lot of his work is installing "smart" meters. He said they've been told that the existing meters can be upgraded by replacing a module - it will be interesting to find out.
Of course, we are expected to believe that this massive database with lots of organisations linked to it will be "completely secure"
I doubt that an individual would be allowed access to the data.
I don't know if the current "smart" meters use a standard protocol for the home network - but the new ones to be installed certainly will as it's in the spec (lookup SMETS2). Having had a look through it, there is certainly mention of multiple internal devices connecting to it - so in principle it should be possible to put together a local data collection system and access that remotely.
Now, you do not need a "Smart" meter to do any monitoring - there are plenty of systems around that allow you to put a current probe (clip on CT) on one of your meter tails, and which will give you accurate real-time information on usage - note that these also need a voltage connection as well (can come through it's power supply) or they cannot measure power factor and can only guestimate actual power. So avoid any models that only clip on and run on batteries - they are NOT power meters.
There are also sensors that can stick on the front of various meter types and detect pulses - I've an idea many meters have a small moving magnet that can be used to detect internal movement of the mechanism and count whatever the unit per pulse is.
On Monday I had an isolator installed, and it was interesting chatting with the guy doing the work - a lot of his work is installing "smart" meters. He said they've been told that the existing meters can be upgraded by replacing a module - it will be interesting to find out.
Of course, we are expected to believe that this massive database with lots of organisations linked to it will be "completely secure"
I doubt that an individual would be allowed access to the data.
I don't know if the current "smart" meters use a standard protocol for the home network - but the new ones to be installed certainly will as it's in the spec (lookup SMETS2). Having had a look through it, there is certainly mention of multiple internal devices connecting to it - so in principle it should be possible to put together a local data collection system and access that remotely.
Now, you do not need a "Smart" meter to do any monitoring - there are plenty of systems around that allow you to put a current probe (clip on CT) on one of your meter tails, and which will give you accurate real-time information on usage - note that these also need a voltage connection as well (can come through it's power supply) or they cannot measure power factor and can only guestimate actual power. So avoid any models that only clip on and run on batteries - they are NOT power meters.
There are also sensors that can stick on the front of various meter types and detect pulses - I've an idea many meters have a small moving magnet that can be used to detect internal movement of the mechanism and count whatever the unit per pulse is.
DIYnot Local
Staff member
If you need to find a tradesperson to get your job done, please try our local search below, or if you are doing it yourself you can find suppliers local to you.
Select the supplier or trade you require, enter your location to begin your search.
Are you a trade or supplier? You can create your listing free at DIYnot Local
Sponsored Links
