Home security: a failure to launch

D-Link home surveillance camera

Here's a surprise: in 2016 we'll be taking a few holidays.

The last time we had an extended break (France/Italy 2014) we left ample dry food for the cat and monitored his feeding habits remotely through the D-Link home security cameras I'd purchased.

The cat survived 14 days human deprivation but appeared to be psychologically-scarred. At the end of the holiday, as Clare entered the front door, it pawed at her feet emitting piteous screams of relief (or that was how it was interpreted).

As a consequence, Clare has engaged a young lady named Susie to pop around daily during our forthcoming absence to feed/mentor/soothe the animal; Susie met with us at home this afternoon.

I draw a different lesson as regards our prospective holidays. My thoughts rather tend to the optimal placement of security cameras so I can check the house (and possibly the pet) during our absence. This morning, I brought one of the cameras into the living room, thinking to attach it to the router next to the TV. Sadly, after a few minutes, Clare caught sight of the wiring.

"What's all this?" she exclaimed, the frown of suspicion on her face.

Difficult to explain one's security deployment concepts when the demerits of surveillance of the cat-visitor are rather forcefully being brought to one's attention. Our little discussion - rather one way in truth - was brought to an end by Clare confiscating and then hiding the offending camera, power supply and ethernet cable.

I got it back this afternoon by grovelling, but apparently European human rights best practice will be applied in future: no surveillance!

---

Technical note: the cameras I have do not record. They provide live streaming when I open the smartphone app ... .

Yeah, like that would work!