Euralarm warns: two years are too short for the network migration of alarm systems
The European association Euralarm has published a position paper on the planned DNA Act (Digital Networks Act) and is criticising the transition periods envisaged. While the current draft legislation provides for a notification and transition period of two years, Euralarm is calling for a lead time of at least seven years. The reason: across Europe, millions of alarm systems depend on existing network infrastructures that are being gradually switched off or modernised. Too short a deadline would result in considerable security gaps.
The core problem: millions of devices dependent on networks
At the heart of Euralarm's criticism is the massive dependence of life-saving services on public electronic communication networks. Specifically affected are:
- Fire detection systems
- Intruder alarm systems
- Social alarm systems (for example telecare devices for elderly and vulnerable people)
All of these systems rely on functioning network infrastructures. A network migration creates considerable technical demands: hardware replacement, product redesign, renewed certification and on-site installation are all necessary. This makes the changeover complex and extremely time-consuming.
Why two years are not enough
Euralarm argues that a two-year window is barely feasible operationally for large-scale migrations. The consequence: there is a risk of temporary gaps in alarm transmission, which could affect a large part of the European population. This would not only bring security risks with it, but would also jeopardise trust in critical infrastructure.
Seven years as a realistic solution
The association has therefore specifically proposed clarifying Article 5.4 of the DNA Act so that changes to networks which could lead to services on existing devices being discontinued must be announced at least seven years in advance.
What a seven-year lead time makes possible
In Euralarm's assessment, this timeframe would benefit several critical areas:
- Technology development: Manufacturers and service providers gain time to develop and certify replacement technologies
- Supply chains: Manufacturing and supply chain structures can be adapted
- Replacement programmes: Structured replacement and modernisation programmes can be set up
- Coordination: Installations can be coordinated with building owners and vulnerable user groups
- Continuity: Life-saving services remain in operation throughout the entire transition period
Why this demand is relevant for the security industry
The DNA network migration is not just a technical issue – it has a direct impact on the functioning of critical security systems. Fire detection systems, for example, are needed to save lives. Intruder alarm systems protect millions of properties across Europe. Social alarm systems are often a lifeline for vulnerable population groups. A chaotic or rushed network changeover endangers all of these functions.
For security companies, alarm services and integrators, too short a deadline means massive operational challenges: customer systems would have to be run in parallel, stock levels adjusted, technicians trained and on-site replacements carried out under time pressure. This would lead to outages, service interruptions and potential liability issues.
Euralarm's demand to EU decision-makers
Euralarm emphasises that it fundamentally supports the modernisation of networks. However, the association regards realistic migration deadlines as necessary in order to protect critical security systems and the citizens who depend on them. The association calls on political decision-makers in the European Union to clarify Article 5.4 in the final legislative text and to explicitly take the concerns of life-saving services into account.
The full position paper can be downloaded from the Euralarm website and provides detailed technical arguments for the lead time being demanded.
Practical implications for security service providers
Regardless of how the final legislation turns out, alarm services and specialist security companies should already be reviewing their system landscapes and running through migration scenarios. A structured inventory of all installed devices, their network dependencies and certification status makes sense. It is also advisable to enter into dialogue with manufacturers about possible transitional solutions at an early stage.
Outlook: What follows from Euralarm's demand?
Euralarm's statement is an important signal to EU legislators that legislation must not disregard technical realities. Whether the seven years will actually be included in the final legislative text remains to be seen. What is clear, however, is that the industry will be intensively occupied with the topic of network migration in the coming years. Planning early saves expensive emergency solutions later.
