Came for The Fonz reference.
Not leaving disappointed.
1 Like
Maybe the perfect time for one of those still-image frame grabs with an embedded link to the video.
Folks follow the jump, leaving BB (so that is a minus), but at least the browser doesn’t expose what you’re trying to conceal.
This doesn’t actually seem that bad (or at least, not nearly as bad as the digital “smart” safe that could be opened by giving it a hard rap on the top, advertised here previously). If you bolted it down and filled in the gap in the corner (it wouldn’t take much, gluing something in the interior corner would cover it), it seems like it would work fine. The major mistake was giving it a carrying handle.
Never happen. That would step him out of the “internet entertainer” role and into the completely different world of certification testing.
If he took their money to test a lock he didn’t open, and it was opened later by a bad guy, he’d be sued for incompetence and possibly held liable for some portion of the original loss.
That said, I’d eagerly seek out an LPL Seal of Approval on any future lock purchase.
He know this, of course. He is a professional lawyer, after all; he only plays an amateur lock picker on TV.
1 Like
I will not be posting the Lockpicking Lawyer again until he opens something by looking at it sternly.
The way we’re heading with facial recognition technologies, I wouldn’t be surprised if the LPL manages to achieve your new threshold requirement for posting.
6 Likes
Why would they start to care now? It isn’t like making acceptable safes or lockboxes is rocket science. If “Make a secure storage safe for guns” was a consideration they would already be doing that. The only concern is “make an impressive looking box as cheaply as possible, both in design and manufacture”
2 Likes
I don’t think so, at least not that he’s disclosed in any of his video’s that I’ve seen.
one of his contemporaries, BosnianBill (of LockLab) looked at one that was Reasonable.
I don’t have time right now to watch a ton, but I did find this one.
Unlike every other brand claimed to be “popular” (not sure if that is his or BBs words), I actually have heard of Hornady. (I am guessing if they are on Amazon they are “popular” because people buy them through the price/Amazon’s suggestion, but I’ve never heard or seen them before in an ad or anything.)
So anyway, he of course still defeats it because he’s a good lock pick. But it doesn’t succumb to the cheater tool, and he has to use the correct tool and had to manually pick the tubular lock. But it doesn’t fail due to some other failing of the design, and IMO, this is a reasonably secure box.
3 Likes
“You call that reasonable? Why, look at the box… ‘un-safe’ is right there in the name!”
2 Likes
Not even. They’ll just show the judge the fine print that was agreed to at purchase. Case dismissed.
Oh man it’s probably only a matter of time before someone uses the “Hannibal Lecter” method to open a safe that uses facial recognition tech.
2 Likes
ok, so I have not watched all his videos, but I have NEVER seen one of these shared/posted of a good safe that’s either very hard to open or that he can’t open. Does one exist? thanks for Googling that for me.
I was going to ask if he had picked it with a Bic pen*, but I guess that impressioning tool he had in the video works in a very similar way.
*Some old Kryptonite bike locks with tubular locks were vulnerable to the Bic pen trick.
3 Likes
You can keep posting these if we get rid of the tabloid thing.
Get a $50 steel box that accepts a padlock. LPL has reviewed several padlocks that he can still bust into, but only with time and skill. Use one of them. Done.
2 Likes
1 Like
From the Ottolock “Adventure Squad” page, describing the co-creator of the product:
" Meet our Leader - Jacob Rathe
Jacob has been riding bicycles at an elite level for over a decade, and he’s only 29. His unassuming humbleness is what makes him great."
I get the impression that, for established companies, the essence of arrogance is knowing what you can get away with and acting accordingly; while for startups the arrogance has been largely purified of pragmatic cynicism by exposure to supercritical delusion.
Periodically one has the unpleasant opportunity to watch a company cross the inflection point between these two styles(eg. Uber); much less often one gets the opportunity to see the process reverse itself(The WeWork Prospectus Incident was perhaps an exemplar of explosive decompression of supercritical delusion; Theranos a case of sizing your arrogance according to startup rules but attempting to wield it according to incumbent rules).
If I were in a better and more charitable mood I’d be inclined to suspect that Master Lock has plenty of experience moving whatever SKUs the balance sheet says are a good idea; and doesn’t really take the snark personally; while someone who poured themselves into a project is more likely to have emotional attachments that are difficult to look past; but frankly I’ve not had a ‘goodwill to men’ sort of day; so I’ll leave that one as it may.
Curiously the ‘smart’ locks often outperform the conventional ones in terms of seconds-to-defeat through sheer incompetence.
When faced with a normal lock he’ll have a pick in the core and be coaxing pins right away; and that’s usually over quickly.
The ‘smart’ models, by contrast, seem to be designed by people more familar with basic consumer electronics widgets; and locating and unscrewing 2-4 ill-concealed and completely externally unprotected screws(occasionally even security torx rather than phillips!); then pulling the lock apart without damaging any of the internal wiring requires zero skill but enough manual labor to bulk the attack out a bit.
Committing a category error that actually slows the opponent down more than mere incompetence is almost impressive, honestly.
3 Likes
This is worth saying twice!
You can in the UK, or rather, you could insist on a full refund because the safe was “not fit for purpose”. Consumer rights laws are just one of those boring regulations that I’m sure glorious leader Boris will soon be getting rid of though.
Those aren’t interesting or exciting, so you won’t see them unless you go looking.
For the same reason “Dog Bites Man” is not a headline, because it’s normal and expected, whereas “Man Bites Dog” will make the front page.
