Ryan, I went ahead and ordered your 3 volume set of "A Comprehensive Guide to the 2020 NEC". As for the July 4th date, I assumed that they were talking about the delay in shipment would be on that date. Thanks for all that you do to help the folks out there in the electrical field.
I retired from a large hospital/research center ( 5 millon square feet ). They had 15 dual service 13.2 KV Substations. Only 5 or 6 had card acess while rest had a key lock where too many people had the key. Great thing about card reader is you can go back and see who enterted. Only a few had cameras outside of substation. Maybe requiring a key along with a password to adjust trip settings would provide better security. Thanks for another great vid.
Excellent explanations. Much appreciated. I'd like a little clarification on the maintenance mode or ARMS switch, for energy reduction. Your explanation doesn't mention the location of the switch in the circuit. Does the switch need to be upstream in order to reduce the energy downstream? So, if you're working in a main breaker section that also has a maintenance mode switch, and if you are also exposed to the LINE side of that breaker, then the maintenance mode switch doesn't reduce the exposure. In that case, the maintenance mode switch would need to be at an upstream clearing device.
Can you feed a 30 a bkr with a #10 tap con then come off the line side and feed another 30 a bkr with #10 and so on or does each 30 a bkr have to have its own #10 "tap conductor"?
Great work!!! Love the work. Can't say enough good things about your channel. As an aside, 0.07 seconds is a long, long, long time for skin to be in plasma.
I think the suit only protects from thermal energy( burns) . Above 40 the thermal blast at 100 cal/cm2 will throw you across the room with much force. But at least it will be open casket ( no burns ).
Instead of requiring a password they should require 2FA: pincode + OTP generated by some security device (could be a smartphone). That is the most common way to protect sensitive things over the internet. Banks use it to let users access their finances, and employers use it to let employees logon onto their work VPN, etc. Proven safety. That password requirement is pretty bad, not even describing requirements to the password, max logon tries before getting locked out, a timeout between tries, such things which keeps hackers from brute forcing the password with scripts.
Never saw a face down disconnect but would never install one this way. Have came across face up disconnects on top of machinery and most of the times made LOTTO or quick shutdown a pain.
Further elaboration: this type of equipment would require regular software updates, access control logs, likely need the addition of Two Factor Authentication, etc. It will require its own audit, and additional hands ( IT/IS) accessing the equipment, who many not know proper Electrical Safety, or Facilities/EHS who have minimal Cybersecurity Training.
Indeed. Apple can't make it's phone secure and they have a building full of people working on it. How secure do you think a programmable breaker is going to be from a company that sells a few dozen of them a year? (absolutely not at all.)
Feel free to reach out to me if you're putting in NEC recommendations. Bottom line don't use this stuff. There is nothing you can do that has not been broken. We have a saying with windows systems No breaking, just entering. When's the last time that was patched? And remember those only patch known vulnerabilities. There's usually a few weeks or months between CVE announcement and patch delivery. In addition you had better bet the signatures for these systems are well known to most intelligence agencies around the world. Do you honestly think some rinky dink group of electricians stands a chance against state sponsored actors? To which you're probably thinking well that only matters for govt, but what happens the moment a high profile politician checks into a hospital. Or the adversary order of battle indicates your breaker controls a critical piece of city infrastructure feeding a defense facility or is part of a manufacturer of the defense industrial base or would cripple civilian infrastructure. The best rule you could pass is to mandate those systems never touch the open internet and prescribe the updates come from recently wiped computers to prevent an air gap jump attack.
@@RyanJacksonElectrical Yea that kinda terrifies me more. Curious do they have actual security practitioners in those discussions? This is in the realm of CompE not EE. And worse no one in the civilian side really even thinks to the degree we do.
@@steven7650 There are written industry standards. The NEC wouldn't tell you what the cybersecurity requirements would be, just if you need to have them or not.
Depends on who's on the board(NEC). Sounds sorta like Schneider has their foot on the throttle in this case. password? lol. Money grab. Thing is that this software creeping into the code bypasses simple physics and mathematics and introduces conjecture. A dangerous path, IMO. Book will expand to 10,000 pages of ambiguity and confusion. Comin up!
![[LIVE] BABYMONSTER(베이비몬스터) - DRIP | 두시탈출 컬투쇼](http://i.ytimg.com/vi/UG05pxLGwzc/mqdefault.jpg)
Ryan, I went ahead and ordered your 3 volume set of "A Comprehensive Guide to the 2020 NEC". As for the July 4th date, I assumed that they were talking about the delay in shipment would be on that date. Thanks for all that you do to help the folks out there in the electrical field.
Awesome, thanks for your support!
I just got confirmation that the shipping note is for the schools that use my books in their curriculum. You should get yours soon. Thanks again!
I retired from a large hospital/research center ( 5 millon square feet ). They had 15 dual service 13.2 KV Substations. Only 5 or 6 had card acess while rest had a key lock where too many people had the key. Great thing about card reader is you can go back and see who enterted. Only a few had cameras outside of substation. Maybe requiring a key along with a password to adjust trip settings would provide better security. Thanks for another great vid.
Clear as needed Mr. Ryan Jackson. Very good item and better explanation. Thanks for your time and for sharing your knowlegde. Great work.
Excellent explanations. Much appreciated. I'd like a little clarification on the maintenance mode or ARMS switch, for energy reduction. Your explanation doesn't mention the location of the switch in the circuit. Does the switch need to be upstream in order to reduce the energy downstream? So, if you're working in a main breaker section that also has a maintenance mode switch, and if you are also exposed to the LINE side of that breaker, then the maintenance mode switch doesn't reduce the exposure. In that case, the maintenance mode switch would need to be at an upstream clearing device.
I agree.
Can you feed a 30 a bkr with a #10 tap con then come off the line side and feed another 30 a bkr with #10 and so on or does each 30 a bkr have to have its own #10 "tap conductor"?
Great work!!! Love the work. Can't say enough good things about your channel.
As an aside, 0.07 seconds is a long, long, long time for skin to be in plasma.
I think the suit only protects from thermal energy( burns) . Above 40 the thermal blast at 100 cal/cm2 will throw you across the room with much force. But at least it will be open casket ( no burns ).
Instead of requiring a password they should require 2FA: pincode + OTP generated by some security device (could be a smartphone). That is the most common way to protect sensitive things over the internet. Banks use it to let users access their finances, and employers use it to let employees logon onto their work VPN, etc. Proven safety. That password requirement is pretty bad, not even describing requirements to the password, max logon tries before getting locked out, a timeout between tries, such things which keeps hackers from brute forcing the password with scripts.
I am guessing (although I feel somewhat confident) that there are SOME securities, I just don't know what they are are how extravagant/complex.
Never saw a face down disconnect but would never install one this way. Have came across face up disconnects on top of machinery and most of the times made LOTTO or quick shutdown a pain.
240.6(c)4 is a nightmare for Cybersecurity
Further elaboration: this type of equipment would require regular software updates, access control logs, likely need the addition of Two Factor Authentication, etc. It will require its own audit, and additional hands ( IT/IS) accessing the equipment, who many not know proper Electrical Safety, or Facilities/EHS who have minimal Cybersecurity Training.
Indeed. Apple can't make it's phone secure and they have a building full of people working on it. How secure do you think a programmable breaker is going to be from a company that sells a few dozen of them a year? (absolutely not at all.)
@@jfbeam See in re: Stuxnet virus
Excellent
Define available arcing current
Feel free to reach out to me if you're putting in NEC recommendations. Bottom line don't use this stuff. There is nothing you can do that has not been broken. We have a saying with windows systems No breaking, just entering. When's the last time that was patched? And remember those only patch known vulnerabilities. There's usually a few weeks or months between CVE announcement and patch delivery. In addition you had better bet the signatures for these systems are well known to most intelligence agencies around the world. Do you honestly think some rinky dink group of electricians stands a chance against state sponsored actors? To which you're probably thinking well that only matters for govt, but what happens the moment a high profile politician checks into a hospital. Or the adversary order of battle indicates your breaker controls a critical piece of city infrastructure feeding a defense facility or is part of a manufacturer of the defense industrial base or would cripple civilian infrastructure.
The best rule you could pass is to mandate those systems never touch the open internet and prescribe the updates come from recently wiped computers to prevent an air gap jump attack.
Believe me, it is being heavily discussed.
@@RyanJacksonElectrical Yea that kinda terrifies me more. Curious do they have actual security practitioners in those discussions? This is in the realm of CompE not EE. And worse no one in the civilian side really even thinks to the degree we do.
@@steven7650 There are written industry standards. The NEC wouldn't tell you what the cybersecurity requirements would be, just if you need to have them or not.
Depends on who's on the board(NEC). Sounds sorta like Schneider has their foot on the throttle in this case. password? lol. Money grab. Thing is that this software creeping into the code bypasses simple physics and mathematics and introduces conjecture. A dangerous path, IMO. Book will expand to 10,000 pages of ambiguity and confusion. Comin up!