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

Lock-Picking Robot

github.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

141–147 of 147 posts

Re: Lock-Picking Robot

#141

Post by jiveturkey »

cloudfudge wrote: post #117
fencepost wrote: post #103

I feel like developing something that could actually pick locks including detecting binding pins, etc. is in the category of "not actually that hard if you devote the resources to it." On the mechanical side there would certainly be some challenges (having to work within a key that's all the deepest cuts, using something that could push up to "shallowest cut" level without deforming, general structural strength probl…

I think the biggest problem is that the amount of tension you need to apply to hold the binding pins can vary quite a bit, and it's hard to build a mechanical device that can feel with enough fidelity to figure it out.

not at all. sensitive strain gauges are commonplace.

Re: Lock-Picking Robot

#142

Post by fencepost »

cloudfudge wrote: post #117
fencepost wrote: post #103

I feel like developing something that could actually pick locks including detecting binding pins, etc. is in the category of "not actually that hard if you devote the resources to it." On the mechanical side there would certainly be some challenges (having to work within a key that's all the deepest cuts, using something that could push up to "shallowest cut" level without deforming, general structural strength probl…

I think the biggest problem is that the amount of tension you need to apply to hold the binding pins can vary quite a bit, and it's hard to build a mechanical device that can feel with enough fidelity to figure it out.

Not really, once you have any materials issues with the vertical portion ironed out you just need a fine but rigid shaft within the body of the 'key' to bring it all the way out to where you have plenty of space to work. You'd need to have the shaft in a tight channel, but that's purely mechanical and should work just fine over even several inches.

Re: Lock-Picking Robot

#143

Post by cush »

raincole wrote: post #26
cush wrote: post #23

The number of comments in here slandering the developer’s morality for picking locks is actually pretty surprising for a site literally called Hacker News. Every day there’s a story on the front page of some grey/white-hat showing off an exploit they found to infiltrate a site we all use. It’s an odd double standard.

> the number of comments Two of them in total, if I counted right.

Har har. At the time I commented it was the top comments and a few replies

Re: Lock-Picking Robot

#144

Post by cloudfudge »

jiveturkey wrote: post #141
cloudfudge wrote: post #117

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I think the biggest problem is that the amount of tension you need to apply to hold the binding pins can vary quite a bit, and it's hard to build a mechanical device that can feel with enough fidelity to figure it out.

not at all. sensitive strain gauges are commonplace.

I think if you actually tried to build this, you'd find that highly sensitive strain gauges are not sufficient. The human hand is extremely sensitive, and for example can detect tiny clicks and vibrations that you're not going to get with a simple strain gauge.

Re: Lock-Picking Robot

#145

Post by figers »

stackghost wrote: post #57
dormento wrote: post #52

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Still astounding in a place where "hackers" congregate.

This place lost its hacker lustre at least 10 years ago. I registered my first account in 2011 or so and even then it had plenty of "pro-big corporate" energy here.

If it lost it 10 years ago... where's website that still has the hacker ethos?

Re: Lock-Picking Robot

#146

Post by petsfed »

quickthrowman wrote: post #107
petsfed wrote: post #41

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Eh, its more that any one security tactic will almost certainly not cover the entire threat space. Locks are very good at discouraging honest people and lazy, opportunistic people. They are not very good at discouraging generally skilled and motivated people, or people who are specifically interested in what's behind a specific door. Locks are no obstacle if the intruder is willing to use social engineering. But if a…

> But if all they're trying to do is get into my garden shed, they're going to have to manipulate me or my spouse. You can cut virtually any padlock with a battery powered angle grinder or battery powered hydraulic bolt/rebar cutters in under 30 seconds, there’s hundreds of YouTube videos that demonstrate it if you want to see for yourself. Lithium-ion battery powered tools changed the game. Locks do not provide real…

> Locks do not provide real physical security, they just keep honest and lazy people out.

Really?! I had no idea! I had such a miniscule understanding of what portion of the threat space locks address that the second sentence in the very fucking post you're replying is this:

> Locks are very good at discouraging honest people and lazy, opportunistic people.

I'm so ignorant of the threat space, that the sentence immediately following that one goes:

> They are not very good at discouraging generally skilled and motivated people, or people who are specifically interested in what's behind a specific door.

I guess you're right, the two sentences I wrote 76 characters before the one you're shitting all over as evidence of my ignorance have absolutely no bearing on the context of the statement I made. They just exist entirely disconnected from any other sentences in that same post. I bow to your superior intellect and analytical skills.

Re: Lock-Picking Robot

#147

Post by scubbo »

pipes wrote: post #76
scubbo wrote: post #72

Earlier quoted context omitted.

This is linguistic nonsense on a par with disliking the phrase "my spouse" because it implies ownership. You can easily talk of "my country" or "my university" without claiming ownership, just as one can talk of "a sense of belonging" or of "belonging to a club" without feeling owned. Words have several meanings.

Yet, if I said my wife belonged to me I think I would get a few rebukes.

Yes, that's exactly my point. "X belongs to Y" and "Y owns X" and "X is Y's " are not perfectly synonymous - despite considerable overlap, they have different shades of meaning.
Post reply on HN