3 ms·

It's fun to point out to laypeople how insecure the mechanical locks are, and how easy they are to pick. But it's less often mentioned that this is a desirable

• NikolaeVarius 6y ago
  You cut it
  • snet0 6y ago
    I think this is kind of central to what a perfect lock would be. The only non-authorised access should be destructive.
    • kube-system 6y ago
      While there are some locks that attempt to do stuff like this (Bowley locks?), the trade off for perfection is cost and recoverability. This might be useful for niche use-cases or academic reasons, but for a commercial product, the value proposition doesn't make as much sense. After a certain point of pick/bypass resistance, adding cost to a lock isn't actually protecting most users from any plausible attacker. And is more likely to prevent the authorized user from gaining access in a lockout scenario than it is to prevent a real-world attack. In most cases where someone faces a sophisticated attacker that could bypass a security lock, you'd be better served by layering other security techniques, instead of putting your eggs all in one basket with the physical lock.
• johannes1234321 6y ago
  And in addition: the weak spot often isn't the lock but the window next to it, the door frame or similar. The lock prevents somebody from getting in by accident (I had my drunk neighbor once trying to get into my place at night ...) but the typical door and lock don't protect against somebody who wants to to get in. For that protection you have to pay a lot more