Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

Robot cracks open safe live on Def Con's stage

bbc.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

111–120 of 122 posts

Re: Robot cracks open safe live on Def Con's stage

#111

Post by A_Person »

Ccecil wrote: post #39
p4lindromica wrote: post #7

Earlier quoted context omitted.

How do I find a UL-security-rated safe? Does it matter if I don't bolt it to the floor?

I have seen safes which you put a number of weights in the bottom, then you move the safe and door separate which both weigh a lot each. The hope is that once assembled and weighted it can't be moved easily. But...clever fools and all...so nothing is perfect and more layers of protection cost more money.

> The hope is that once assembled and weighted it can't be moved easily.

It's amazing how heavy a burglar safe is - even a small one. I have one just big enough to store some documents, spare phone, keys, and some cash. But it took two guys and a trolley to get it up the stairs to my apartment. Even if a burglar could rip it out of the floor, and push it down the stairs, I doubt that they could lift it up into their car or whatever.

Re: Robot cracks open safe live on Def Con's stage

#112

Post by saagarjha »

agumonkey wrote: post #86
tiziano88 wrote: post #77

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Then it should not have taken you 800 attempts?

In reality there are other issues: - mechanism is rusty - has backlash/play you're never sure you isolated the empty slot, so you assume so, go deeper, then backtrack when you reached the leaf of that exploration tree. Also, the double scan thing made it quick enough to avoid trying to probe too long for the right slot, hence the hybrid solution.

800/999 is worse than brute force at that point…

Re: Robot cracks open safe live on Def Con's stage

#113

Post by agumonkey »

saagarjha wrote: post #112
agumonkey wrote: post #86

Earlier quoted context omitted.

In reality there are other issues: - mechanism is rusty - has backlash/play you're never sure you isolated the empty slot, so you assume so, go deeper, then backtrack when you reached the leaf of that exploration tree. Also, the double scan thing made it quick enough to avoid trying to probe too long for the right slot, hence the hybrid solution.

800/999 is worse than brute force at that point…

How so ?

Re: Robot cracks open safe live on Def Con's stage

#114

Post by palunon »

agumonkey wrote: post #113
saagarjha wrote: post #112

Earlier quoted context omitted.

800/999 is worse than brute force at that point…

How so ?

By bruteforcing randomly, you'll find the combination in 500 attempts on average.

To have to make 800 guesses, you need to have pretty bad luck, or a strategy worse than bruteforce.

Re: Robot cracks open safe live on Def Con's stage

#115

Post by vanderZwan »

palunon wrote: post #114
agumonkey wrote: post #113

Earlier quoted context omitted.

How so ?

By bruteforcing randomly, you'll find the combination in 500 attempts on average. To have to make 800 guesses, you need to have pretty bad luck, or a strategy worse than bruteforce.

Average says nothing about how often you'd expect to take more than 800 attempts or more unlock, which I guess is 199/999 or one in five times

Re: Robot cracks open safe live on Def Con's stage

#116

Post by closeparen »

DrScump wrote: post #11
thesmallestcat wrote: post #5

Somebody dumb enough to leave a key to their house right next to their house in a city like SF deserves to get burglarized.

Gotta love this attitude, which is widely shared by Bay Area media and law enforcement. - "You shouldn't have parked there. " - "You shouldn't have left anything visible in your vehicle." - "You shouldn't have left anything in visible in the trunk, either." As for "key right next to house" how else do you propose letting agents show your property to prospective buyers or tenants? In SF, property crimes don't matter.…

It is the policy of San Francisco to annoy and harass car owners into switching to bicycling and public transit. Why would the city undermine its own policy goals by going after people who help deter driving and car ownership? It would make more sense to pay the people who smash car windows than it would to lock them up.

Re: Robot cracks open safe live on Def Con's stage

#117

Post by agumonkey »

palunon wrote: post #114
agumonkey wrote: post #113

Earlier quoted context omitted.

How so ?

By bruteforcing randomly, you'll find the combination in 500 attempts on average. To have to make 800 guesses, you need to have pretty bad luck, or a strategy worse than bruteforce.

bruh... you think I can remember all the random attempts in my head ?

Re: Robot cracks open safe live on Def Con's stage

#118

Post by saagarjha »

agumonkey wrote: post #113
saagarjha wrote: post #112

Earlier quoted context omitted.

800/999 is worse than brute force at that point…

How so ?

On average it would take around 500 guesses. One would have expected that with your "method" you could have reduced this by an order of magnitude (i.e. not 800) at least. Otherwise you're really just wasting time with additional steps for each trial.

Re: Robot cracks open safe live on Def Con's stage

#119

Post by sobani »

ChuckMcM wrote: post #96
micaksica wrote: post #37

Earlier quoted context omitted.

You bought a TL-15 safe for your home? Where did you place it? Even the smaller TL-15 safes weigh hundreds of pounds and require some logistics to place. They are very impractical for most apartment dweller types, or even some high-density, old-construction flats because of their weight.

> You bought a TL-15 safe for your home? Yes I did. It did not weigh hundreds of pounds. Its location was constrained a bit by where it could be secured to the structure but not unreasonably so. And it wasn't like I've got paintings or something in it, just stuff that if the house burned down I'd want to have survive and a few things I'd rather other folks not have (like passports).

From this thread I've learned that a people-resistant safe might not be fire-resistant.

Please check if your safe can actually handle heat and water.

Re: Robot cracks open safe live on Def Con's stage

#120

Post by ChuckMcM »

sobani wrote: post #119
ChuckMcM wrote: post #96

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> You bought a TL-15 safe for your home? Yes I did. It did not weigh hundreds of pounds. Its location was constrained a bit by where it could be secured to the structure but not unreasonably so. And it wasn't like I've got paintings or something in it, just stuff that if the house burned down I'd want to have survive and a few things I'd rather other folks not have (like passports).

From this thread I've learned that a people-resistant safe might not be fire-resistant. Please check if your safe can actually handle heat and water.

That is correct, and something to specify when buying a safe. In our case I was actually replacing a fire safe that my wife had bought at CostCo so fire resistance was a 'must have' feature. It has has our critical documents in it and a key to the safe deposit box where actually valuable but not something you might need to get out at home stuff is kept.
Post reply on HN