5 ms·
Well, except for this line: "As a result, all anyone needs to open many locks previously considered “unbumpable” ..." You are implying that this has made the
by emhart 12y ago
Well, except for this line:
"As a result, all anyone needs to open many locks previously considered “unbumpable” ..."
You are implying that this has made the impossible, possible. I think that may be valarauca's point of contention.
- valarauca1 12y agoThat is my point. Key locks have this fundamental design flaw. The difficulty of exploiting this flaw differs from lock to lock, yet the flaw still exists. Its inherited from the fundamental design of the lock. When the flaw becomes easier to exploit its isn't so much news, it was bound to happen anyways, I mean your just wrapping iron bandages around a flaw and causing it fixed. This happens in software security all the time. The flaw still exists, just we added an abstraction above the flaw, that makes the flaw harder to exploit.