161–170 of 328 posts
Interesting design. I made a lock a couple years ago that is quite similar in principle (though this design is different and has a couple nice improvements). https://youtu.be/_7vPNcnYWQ4 One of my main goals is to be an inspiration, though if it was based by my design I wish they’d credit it. Especially since they’re patenting it.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Def want to see Enclave's under Lock Picking Lawyer! If you make a "unpickable lock" you'd def want to send it to LPL, that's like the ultimate proof of how easy/hard it is to pick. The fact that there's no video, with how approachable LPL is and accepts random locks in his PO box, can only be seen as a red flag. Do it in the open, like Stuff Made Here!
> that's like the ultimate proof of how easy/hard it is to pick I would assume there's much better locksmiths on the planet than the most famous one on youtube who does it as a side job.
I don't know if this is too slow of an attack to count, but you could build an automated lockpicking machine that would iterate over the possible pin height combinations. If a fast robotic machine could input & test one key pattern per second, it would find the correct pattern in 12.96 hours or less. One pattern per second should be quite feasible. Here's an example video that shows how robots can move very quickly w…
I could imagine each attempt to rotate the cylinder could partially compress a spring-loaded lever. There could be some sort of ratcheting return mechanism that allows the spring to decompress at a known rate (think a kitchen timer). Once the spring is compressed beyond a certain point (e.g. after 5 failed attempts), a mechanism locks out the cylinder until the return mechanism allows the spring to decompress back to its starting position.
If the lockout happened after 5 failed attempts, and the lockout duration was 10 minutes, an attacker could test at a maximum rate of 30 combinations per hour. It would take 64 days to check all 46,656 possible combinations, or 32 days on average to find the solution.
In the YouTube video explanation around 2:30, when individual positions (not sure if it's the correct word: talking about the different parts of the lock's inner array moving based on the position of the key/pick) are picked, why doesn't the inner mechanism at snap back to its initial state by the spring's force when key/pick is moved out of that position?
And how do they reset when lock is turned and unturned back to initial rotation state if they don't reset when individual positions are released?
(Sorry if I used a terribly wrong terminology)
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Def want to see Enclave's under Lock Picking Lawyer! If you make a "unpickable lock" you'd def want to send it to LPL, that's like the ultimate proof of how easy/hard it is to pick. The fact that there's no video, with how approachable LPL is and accepts random locks in his PO box, can only be seen as a red flag. Do it in the open, like Stuff Made Here!
> that's like the ultimate proof of how easy/hard it is to pick I would assume there's much better locksmiths on the planet than the most famous one on youtube who does it as a side job.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Its the standard procedure for "unpickable" locks before SMH's lock too.
Yeah same idea behind my lock too: https://youtu.be/7hUonUE1hEY I'd guess many many people have had this same idea.
This looks very similar to the design[0] by Stuff Made Here (and collaborative hardening [1] suggestions by Lock Picking Lawyer)…an excellent set of videos. https://youtu.be/2A2NY29iQdI https://youtu.be/Ecy1FBdCRbQ
Earlier quoted context omitted.
You absolutely should sue them with prior art or something if they patent it. You had an amazing fairly well distributed YouTube video with this design anyway.
Anyone here can submit prior art during the patenting process. No suing or courts involved. You only have to care enough to make the submission. Interestingly, videos don't seem to count? It must be a written description? https://www.uspto.gov/web/offices/pac/mpep/s2206.html
Wondering the same myself. Googeling for this issue turns up this power-point [1] which seems to imply on page 6 that "electronic publications, on-line databases, websites, or Internet publications" are also considered as "printed documents". But this is just a power-point so who knows which standard gets applied in practice.
I get the impression that the "printed document" language got written before digital documents and the internet were a thing.
I am not a laywer, don't know a thing about the topic, this is not legal advice etc.
[1] https://www.uspto.gov/sites/default/files/documents/May%20In...