DailyDirt: Keep It Secret. Keep It Safe.
from the urls-we-dig-up dept
Not that long ago, a very common bike lock was rendered ridiculously insecure when it was revealed on the internet that a cheap plastic pen and some twisting skills were all that were needed to open the lock without a key. Lock picking has been around for centuries with some locks being easier to crack than others, making some people distrust various lock-makers or distrust certain lock-pickers. Whoever the “bad guy” is, keeping things secret and safe has been a challenge and will continue to be one. Here are just a few more examples of locks and insecure locks.
- Some (perhaps your?) Master Lock branded padlocks can be cracked in 8 tries or less. Thieves don’t need a soda can shim — anymore to break into these locks, and hopefully you don’t keep anything really valuable behind a combination padlock. [url]
- The XPUZMAG lock is an unconventional device with a huge key that uses 6 pins to insert into its lock faceplate with 23 holes. It’s not the most convenient key to carry around, but if you’d like to foil the casual lockpickers in your neighborhood, this lock would probably do the trick. [url]
- Alfred Charles Hobbs was an American locksmith who picked the Chubb detector lock in 1851. Before Hobbs demonstrated his lock picking skills, there was about a 70-year period of time when locks were considered to be pretty much perfect security, but after the 1850s, “perfect security” has been merely an illusion. [url]
After you’ve finished checking out those links, take a look at our Daily Deals for cool gadgets and other awesome stuff.
Filed Under: alfred charles hobbs, bike locks, chubb detector lock, combination locks, lock picking, locks, locksmith, padlocks, perfect security, soda can shim
Companies: kryptonite, master lock, xpuzmag
Comments on “DailyDirt: Keep It Secret. Keep It Safe.”
Encryption is a more difficult ‘lock’ to pick assuming you can scan your documents and the software you’re using has been audited
Re: Re:
and the software you’re using has been audited
By this you mean every piece of software running on your OS as well as the OS itself? Unless you’re running an OS which truly implements process sandboxing, in which case you only need to audit the OS, the encryption software and the OS installation/configuration.
Not to mention maintaining physical security to avoid anyone beating you into decrypting the document for them. https://xkcd.com/538/
Just like physical locks, it’s usually easier to go around the lock than to open it directly.
PSA: The XPUZMAG is odd looking, but as easy to pick as a tubular lock (which it effectively is.) The locks have no security pins and the fake pins are very easy to identify based on feel. They are case of security through obscurity; now that videos on them are on lockpicker YouTube channels and discussions on them are on forums they are a novelty.
The Forever lock, on the other hand is pretty epic.
Re: Re:
This Forever lock? http://gawker.com/unpickable-forever-lock-totally-pickable-1589893600
Re: Re: Re:
That video is the only one showing it being picked that I’ve heard of, and is full of jump cuts and bad angles. You may trust it, but I trust those that try without said theatrics and fail.
Ironically
All of the usual style locks (of the sort used on doors and deadbolts) can be picked. The ironic thing is that the higher quality locks are more vulnerable than the cheaper ones to the two easiest lock-picking methods: bump keys and pick guns.
Re: Ironically
The tighter the tolerances are the harder it will be to pick, bump, or snap gun the lock. The more security pins there are the harder it will be to pick the lock (with no impact on bumping or snap gunning.) The more key control features there are the harder it will be to pick, bump, or snap gun the lock.
I’m not sure how you’re defining quality here.