Cuddeback's Cuddelink

[Bill]

I hope the 2018 release of the home unit that connects directly to a PC comes out before summer.

I'm planning on testing the system to replace cameras close to home and then use the Buckeyes for the further from home locations. Two completly different systems will run in the same PC.

 

[Red Picqua]

I like this Cuddelink system. I do have a few questions for anyone that is currently using this. (apologize if asked earlier, I looked and didn't see it asked)

I have been reading some of the information on the set up of the cameras. On the HOME unit you must pick one of 16 "channels" to use. I am assuming that all the cameras are using the same channel very similar to walky talkies.

1. What if my neighbor is using the cuddelink system and we are on the same channel?

2. What if my neighbor deploys a camera/home and jumps on my channel can he/she receive all those same images?

3. What if my neighbor has a camera close to my system would he know if I was getting his images or would it go undetected?

thanks so much. still looks like a great system.

 

[yoderjac]

I like this Cuddelink system. I do have a few questions for anyone that is currently using this. (apologize if asked earlier, I looked and didn't see it asked)

I have been reading some of the information on the set up of the cameras. On the HOME unit you must pick one of 16 "channels" to use. I am assuming that all the cameras are using the same channel very similar to walky talkies.

1. What if my neighbor is using the cuddelink system and we are on the same channel?

2. What if my neighbor deploys a camera/home and jumps on my channel can he/she receive all those same images?

3. What if my neighbor has a camera close to my system would he know if I was getting his images or would it go undetected?

thanks so much. still looks like a great system.

I'll let other address the cuddeback system specifically, but they are using the same free 900mhz spectrum as my system. My system works a little differently as each camera has a unique serial number set at the factory and cameras are registered with the base and will only communicate with that base or other cameras associated with the base. So, with my BEC system, which is a frequency hopper, if another system were within range, it would be seen as interference like a 900mhz cordless phone or any other commercial device using that spectrum. Noise (interference) from other RF devices would simply cause some packet loss requiring retransmission of lost packets. I have both an Orion and X-Series network running. They both use the same general frequency band but slightly different frequency ranges. They are both frequency hoppers using different radios. I have zero interference between these systems even with the base antennas on the same mast about 3' apart.

Keep in mind that the FCC limits transmit power in this frequency range specifically to keep neighbors from interfering with each other. Some systems us "channel" to alter the frequency range a bit to keep from interfering with another system. Others have smart radios that change the frequency hopping list as needed within a range to avoid interference.

I'm sure cuddie is smart enough to have a higher level communications protocol the precludes another system from receiving your pictures. Having said that, I doubt any of these system use encryption. That means all of the information is in the air and available. Someone with the right equipment could intercept the pictures. However, that would not really be practical given the cost of the equipment that would be necessary and the limited value of spying on someone else's pictures.

Bottom line, I doubt you have anything to worry about on your concern list. Someone from cuddeback and talk about their system in particular.

Thanks,

Jack

 

[john volkman]

I like this Cuddelink system. I do have a few questions for anyone that is currently using this. (apologize if asked earlier, I looked and didn't see it asked)

I have been reading some of the information on the set up of the cameras. On the HOME unit you must pick one of 16 "channels" to use. I am assuming that all the cameras are using the same channel very similar to walky talkies.

1. What if my neighbor is using the cuddelink system and we are on the same channel?

2. What if my neighbor deploys a camera/home and jumps on my channel can he/she receive all those same images?

3. What if my neighbor has a camera close to my system would he know if I was getting his images or would it go undetected?

thanks so much. still looks like a great system.

if you want to check if your neighbor has a system, its as easy as setting one of your cameras to remote, go into the menu and look for CL level while close to the property line. If the remote shows a CL level you know there is another unit within range, at that point change your channel and it will no longer will connect. There is also a report that is built and and sent to your home cam , this report gives you info on what cameras are connected , battery life, images on the card , remaining space on the card how many hops they are using, strength of signal etc. If a neighbor was receiving your images there is several ways to find out and to correct it quickly.

 

[yoderjac]

if you want to check if your neighbor has a system, its as easy as setting one of your cameras to remote, go into the menu and look for CL level while close to the property line. If the remote shows a CL level you know there is another unit within range, at that point change your channel and it will no longer will connect. There is also a report that is built and and sent to your home cam , this report gives you info on what cameras are connected , battery life, images on the card , remaining space on the card how many hops they are using, strength of signal etc. If a neighbor was receiving your images there is several ways to find out and to correct it quickly.

Wow! I didn't expect it to be that insecure! I expected there would be at least some kind of registration between the cameras and the base. Are you actually saying that if you and a neighbor have the same channel they could actually receive the pictures from your camera? I find that an amazing oversight if it is true.

 

[Peplin Creek]

Wow! I didn't expect it to be that insecure! I expected there would be at least some kind of registration between the cameras and the base. Are you actually saying that if you and a neighbor have the same channel they could actually receive the pictures from your camera? I find that an amazing oversight if it is true.

I think that is true. It’s a risk that the user needs to think about with the system. It wasn’t a deal breaker for me. I hope this is something cuddeback will address with a firmware update at some point to add “dual factor authentication” though.

 

[yoderjac]

I think that is true. It’s a risk that the user needs to think about with the system. It wasn’t a deal breaker for me. I hope this is something cuddeback will address with a firmware update at some point to add “dual factor authentication” though.

Pep,

Sounds like a big risk to me. I didn't expect them to be serialized at the factory like the BECs, but think about this risk. A guy buys one and walks around the woods flipping the channel until he gets a signal. He then puts on a little yagi and DFs his way to your camera. He takes it home and adds it to his system. No fuss, no muss. You can't even hide it. Someone could just as easily DF my BECs, but they can't reuse them. Unlike the low end cameras, these are serialized at the factory and you need specialize equipment to change the password. They won't register with another base unless you have the password or send them back to the factory. Once you do that, you it is easy for law enforcement to find you if the user reports the theft to the company.

I would have expected Cuddeback to at least apply some kind of low end security that requires someone to have at least a bit of knowledge to reset a camera. Even registering cameras with a user defined password would be better.

It is probably less of a risk now as they are not yet ubiquitous but they should consider doing something as they roll out the home base and updates.

THanks,

Jack

 

[Peplin Creek]

Pep,

Sounds like a big risk to me. I didn't expect them to be serialized at the factory like the BECs, but think about this risk. A guy buys one and walks around the woods flipping the channel until he gets a signal. He then puts on a little yagi and DFs his way to your camera. He takes it home and adds it to his system. No fuss, no muss. You can't even hide it. Someone could just as easily DF my BECs, but they can't reuse them. Unlike the low end cameras, these are serialized at the factory and you need specialize equipment to change the password. They won't register with another base unless you have the password or send them back to the factory. Once you do that, you it is easy for law enforcement to find you if the user reports the theft to the company.

I would have expected Cuddeback to at least apply some kind of low end security that requires someone to have at least a bit of knowledge to reset a camera. Even registering cameras with a user defined password would be better.

It is probably less of a risk now as they are not yet ubiquitous but they should consider doing something as they roll out the home base and updates.

THanks,

Jack

Yeah, that’s all valid. People will need consider factors like that when purshasing. If you have theft issues in an area, the risks are bigger. I’m not overally concerned with theft as much as I am with someone joining my mess network with another home unit. I wouldn’t be surprised if cuddeback is working on something for it and they just wanted to get the first iteration out the door. Or I guess they completely overlooked it.

 

[Red Picqua]

if you want to check if your neighbor has a system, its as easy as setting one of your cameras to remote, go into the menu and look for CL level while close to the property line. If the remote shows a CL level you know there is another unit within range, at that point change your channel and it will no longer will connect. There is also a report that is built and and sent to your home cam , this report gives you info on what cameras are connected , battery life, images on the card , remaining space on the card how many hops they are using, strength of signal etc. If a neighbor was receiving your images there is several ways to find out and to correct it quickly.

try to keep this as simple as I can. Not being a jerk here either, just trying to figure it out.

Neighbor has a CL system. Neighbor and I are both using the same channel, fate may have it. Will each "slave" or remote still record images and store them to the SD card regardless of transmission errors? Essentially the neighbor and I are both sending each other data but each camera is still able to record to the SD NO MATTER WHAT.

If there is a firmware update needed for the cameras is it possible that the home unit could send out the signal or data to do the update?

I will say it does seem a bit of a flaw if your images could be "hacked" so easily if you knew your neighbor had one. Understanding the chances of this really happening are probably VERY low. I don't think it's a deal breaker but when I was watching the videos on you tube of a portly guy in Cuddeback attire, I believe working for Cuddeback, setting up the cams and he came to the point of channel selection a light bulb went off.

 

[Peplin Creek]

try to keep this as simple as I can. Not being a jerk here either, just trying to figure it out.

Neighbor has a CL system. Neighbor and I are both using the same channel, fate may have it. Will each "slave" or remote still record images and store them to the SD card regardless of transmission errors? Essentially the neighbor and I are both sending each other data but each camera is still able to record to the SD NO MATTER WHAT.

If there is a firmware update needed for the cameras is it possible that the home unit could send out the signal or data to do the update?

I will say it does seem a bit of a flaw if your images could be "hacked" so easily if you knew your neighbor had one. Understanding the chances of this really happening are probably VERY low. I don't think it's a deal breaker but when I was watching the videos on you tube of a portly guy in Cuddeback attire, I believe working for Cuddeback, setting up the cams and he came to the point of channel selection a light bulb went off.

Yes images still get wrote to the SD card no matter what. No, firmware updates do not get pushed out.

 

[Red Picqua]

Yes images still get wrote to the SD card no matter what. No, firmware updates do not get pushed out.

cool

Still like the cameras. I just looked at the price of the Buckeye cams. At $900 a POP, YIKES. I would buy cuddelinks for my neighbor for free and ask that they use a different channel! I am sure Jack will immediately say how much and why they are worth more than I paid for my first car, but point being the value of the CL is still strong compared to other systems.

I hope team Cuddeback is looking at addressing this issue with the system. Like I said not a deal breaker but if I did invest in 10 cameras all my neighbor would need to do is buy ONE home unit and he just got 10 free cameras. NOT a deal breaker but a pretty good flaw in the armor in my humble opinion.

 

[Bill]

Jack I'm not sure the new X80's are password protected. Mine aren't. But maybe I just didn't use that feature. My BE's can't be registered to a new base without first being unregistered from the original base. Making it difficult for someone to steal your camera and use it on their system. Difficult but not impossible, I don't have the sequence or remember off hand how to do it. I have it written down at the farm but BE's cameras can be reset from the camera itself. This would allow someone to steal your camera and add it to their network.

Instructions are not in the manual or on BE's website but trust me it can be done. I lost a base unit with all my cams registered to it. When I recieved my new base I had to reset all my cameras at the camera itself. I've since learned you can copy the files from the old base to the new base on the software side and not have to reset each camera.

So it's true BE's would be nearly impossible to hack pictures from but they can be stolen, registered and used on another system.

No clue if the Orion's could be.

 

[john volkman]

Wow! I didn't expect it to be that insecure! I expected there would be at least some kind of registration between the cameras and the base. Are you actually saying that if you and a neighbor have the same channel they could actually receive the pictures from your camera? I find that an amazing oversight if it is true.

First, its not an oversight. The Cuddelink line had these key factors in mind when it was developed.
1. It works in multiple situations and is reliable.
2. Its easy to set up and operate for the average consumer
3. its affordable for the average deer hunter/land manager
4. its mobile and can be moved with ease
5. The system can easily be adapted or have other cameras and home units etc added to it over time.
6. It allows a user to run multiple cameras with one cell phone plan.

Realistically, if your neighbors are running the same system and your cameras are that close together and somehow one of your images is "stolen" i'm not sure why this is cause for such alarm. Its HIGHLY likely your neighbor is already getting pics of the same deer that you are, especially if your cameras are close enough to connect. Again, its as easy as changing the channel if you think this is happening and the report will tell you or you can quickly and easily determine it in the field. And the high rez image is burned on the card in the remote camera as well.

You act like your neighbors will be able to steal your great grandmothers peanut butter cookie recipe!!! Its a picture of a deer ! not a family secret or your credit card number !!

Jack, you have multiple times noted that this system isnt for you , yet you post on this cuddelink threads more than anyone else. quite humorous actually.

 

[Peplin Creek]

One thing I want people to know with this system is that if given the chance when setting their network, Do it in the summer/early fall time with all the foliage on the trees. If your network is functioning flawlessly at that point. It shouldn’t be an issue come fall. I was seeing a 10-20% signal increase once the leaves were off the trees. I could see situations where if someone sets this up late fall and has signal strength at a 15-20%. Come late spring/summer when things green up. It could be too far away from the home units.

 

[john volkman]

cool

Still like the cameras. I just looked at the price of the Buckeye cams. At $900 a POP, YIKES. I would buy cuddelinks for my neighbor for free and ask that they use a different channel! I am sure Jack will immediately say how much and why they are worth more than I paid for my first car, but point being the value of the CL is still strong compared to other systems.

I hope team Cuddeback is looking at addressing this issue with the system. Like I said not a deal breaker but if I did invest in 10 cameras all my neighbor would need to do is buy ONE home unit and he just got 10 free cameras. NOT a deal breaker but a pretty good flaw in the armor in my humble opinion.

Something like a password is a possible add in the future. The main focus was to make this system easy to set up and use and that would add an extra level right out of the gate.

 

[Peplin Creek]

Something like a password is a possible add in the future. The main focus was to make this system easy to set up and use and that would add an extra level right out of the gate.

I honestly feel like cuddeback just needs to make another setting much like the channel id but let’s say propertyid. So you set to channel 11, propertyid 3. I mean the odds of a neighbor having that set the same or even finding the correct combination would be pretty small. That would keep the system pretty much as easy as it is now. That’s if they want to address it. I think for most users there won’t be an issue anyway.

 

[Red Picqua]

First, its not an oversight. The Cuddelink line had these key factors in mind when it was developed.
1. It works in multiple situations and is reliable.
2. Its easy to set up and operate for the average consumer
3. its affordable for the average deer hunter/land manager
4. its mobile and can be moved with ease
5. The system can easily be adapted or have other cameras and home units etc added to it over time.
6. It allows a user to run multiple cameras with one cell phone plan.

Realistically, if your neighbors are running the same system and your cameras are that close together and somehow one of your images is "stolen" i'm not sure why this is cause for such alarm. Its HIGHLY likely your neighbor is already getting pics of the same deer that you are, especially if your cameras are close enough to connect. Again, its as easy as changing the channel if you think this is happening and the report will tell you or you can quickly and easily determine it in the field. And the high rez image is burned on the card in the remote camera as well.

You act like your neighbors will be able to steal your great grandmothers peanut butter cookie recipe!!! Its a picture of a deer ! not a family secret or your credit card number !!

Jack, you have multiple times noted that this system isnt for you , yet you post on this cuddelink threads more than anyone else. quite humorous actually.

agree with almost all your points here. My ONLY concern is John Volkman is running CL system and has his units set on channel 16 and Red is next door running on the same channel. John sees where the daytime activity is on the same deer we both know is there and John decides because he is a tool of a neighbor (no offense here) that you put up a NEW stand on the line to where that deer was sighted.

I have NO issues discussing deer with my neighbors but I cut them off when we start talking about where I have seen them and when. My "deer intelligence" is for me to close the deal and not set up my neighbor to do the same. I will show them pics of the deer but the pic is cropped for the time, day, and location. I hope you see my point as valid. I would expect the same from them.

I don't suppose when you go fishing you tell your neighbors and talk at every bar you hit as a waterhole where you caught them, what you were using, what day, what time,?? :) all in good humor, my point being, yea we caught a bunch of fish over on Long Lake. Where?? In the water.

But... not gonna poo poo the system. I still like it, just a small chink in the armor. Hopefully they take this as productive feedback. That's all.

 

[Red Picqua]

oh.. the great grandmothers peanut butter cookie recipe. that make me LOL HAHAHHAA

 

[john volkman]

agree with almost all your points here. My ONLY concern is John Volkman is running CL system and has his units set on channel 16 and Red is next door running on the same channel. John sees where the daytime activity is on the same deer we both know is there and John decides because he is a tool of a neighbor (no offense here) that you put up a NEW stand on the line to where that deer was sighted.

I have NO issues discussing deer with my neighbors but I cut them off when we start talking about where I have seen them and when. My "deer intelligence" is for me to close the deal and not set up my neighbor to do the same. I will show them pics of the deer but the pic is cropped for the time, day, and location. I hope you see my point as valid. I would expect the same from them.

I don't suppose when you go fishing you tell your neighbors and talk at every bar you hit as a waterhole where you caught them, what you were using, what day, what time,?? :) all in good humor, my point being, yea we caught a bunch of fish over on Long Lake. Where?? In the water.

But... not gonna poo poo the system. I still like it, just a small chink in the armor. Hopefully they take this as productive feedback. That's all.

it is good feedback and i can understand the concern in that type of situation, the owners manual touches on what happens when trying to run two home units on the same channel, it really wouldn't work correctly in that scenario but there is a slight chance a neighbor could "steal a picture" . I think if this becomes a common or recurring issue for some, an adaptation will be made. For now, ease of use and set up was more important. Again, feed back is always appreciated especially by those that use the system in their unique situation.

 

[yoderjac]

First, its not an oversight. The Cuddelink line had these key factors in mind when it was developed.
1. It works in multiple situations and is reliable.
2. Its easy to set up and operate for the average consumer
3. its affordable for the average deer hunter/land manager
4. its mobile and can be moved with ease
5. The system can easily be adapted or have other cameras and home units etc added to it over time.
6. It allows a user to run multiple cameras with one cell phone plan.

Realistically, if your neighbors are running the same system and your cameras are that close together and somehow one of your images is "stolen" i'm not sure why this is cause for such alarm. Its HIGHLY likely your neighbor is already getting pics of the same deer that you are, especially if your cameras are close enough to connect. Again, its as easy as changing the channel if you think this is happening and the report will tell you or you can quickly and easily determine it in the field. And the high rez image is burned on the card in the remote camera as well.

You act like your neighbors will be able to steal your great grandmothers peanut butter cookie recipe!!! Its a picture of a deer ! not a family secret or your credit card number !!

Jack, you have multiple times noted that this system isnt for you , yet you post on this cuddelink threads more than anyone else. quite humorous actually.

John,

First, if it is not an oversight, it is pretty poor design. I certainly understand the priority list and why you don't go to the expense of serializing cameras. However, there is little cost in establishing a protocol that links the cameras of an individual owner. The concern is not two honest small neighboring land owners. The concern is a poacher turning your own systems against you or a thief using your technology to his advantage to steal and easily reuse your cameras.

Second, I think you completely misunderstood my posts if you think I said the system is not for me. I said the system is not well suited for anyone who is trying to use a wireless system to support QDM. I think it can be a great system for the small land owner/hunter. The QDM type management I do is not my only interest. There are other applications where a system like this may work well for me. Right now, it is simply not a complete enough as a system for me to take time for a hands-on evaluation. However, there are several folks on this forum who are early adopters and providing well balanced review.

The reason I continue to read this thread is because I'm interested in some of the technical information provided by Mark as well as the hands-on information provided by some of the real end-users on the forum, not the sales pitch. I continue to post to this thread because I have quite a bit of experience with RF transmission in this frequency range as well as with wireless camera systems. These threads are much better for readers when folks compare and contract the limitation and benefits of different systems so they can determine what best fits their needs.

If you are looking for a place where only positive things are said about any particular product, you might want to check out the advertising or the infomercials on the hunting channels.

Thanks,

Jack