Has Underwriters Laboratory (UL) revised the balanced magnetic switch (BMS) standard, UL 634, Connectors and Switches for Use with Burglar-Alarm Systems, to establish a Level 2 standard to define more stringent requirements?
As of mid 2010 there are at least three devices listed to the UL 634 Level 2 High Security Standard, so the single source issue is no longer valid. In the case of the Potter and Magnasphere HSS Level 2 devices, the unit cost is more than old technology BMS, but the enhanced features and ease of installation make the "total Installed cost" competitive with the old BMS.
The old BMS contacts have been proven vulnerable to magnetic compromise and defeat by anyone having access to them – i.e. an "insider job". It was this glaring security deficiency that motivated the government to develop a higher standard of security resulting in the Level 2 designation.
Yes. The requirement evolved from requests from certain government departments and agencies for an improved version for high security applications but existing BMS will, not necessarily have to be replaced. It depends on the results of a vulnerability analysis, and the existing and/or offsetting security measures to mitigate the vulnerability. If the asset is located in an area where there are no other protection measures present, then the Level 2 BMS would be appropriate. The BMS is manufactured by a single source and costs considerably more than prior generation BMSs, so a judicious approach should be taken before making an arbitrary decision to replace existing high security BMSs.
Related Questions
- Has Underwriters Laboratory (UL) revised the balanced magnetic switch (BMS) standard, UL 634, Connectors and Switches for Use with Burglar-Alarm Systems, to establish a Level 2 standard to define more stringent requirements?
- Does Greenwoods wood boiler meet UL (Underwriters Laboratory) and Canadian (CSA) standards for safety?
- Are Emitters UL (Underwriter Laboratory) Approved?
