I don't like the fact that my post wasn't published this morning. It IS covered in the FAQ. I haven't read the FAQ in 3 or 4 years though until today. Why was it cut? My ISP, I don't think so. What's up? BTW, if this group isn't moderated then why do I see post that were one subject changed into another: (Re: was this and is now)? Henry? Your a top notch guy and you have 100% of my respect but will you please leave the incoming post to alt.locksmithing alone IF you are doing anything at all. I don't know. Is this group moderated or not?
Now, here is the post I sent off this morning. I don't care if anyone agrees with me but please don't cut it because you don't or because it has been discussed already. I don't care how many times it has been discussed and no I don't know if I spelled that word right, and if my ISP was at fault, then I'm sorry about the big stink.
Maybe I'm barking for no reason but one thing that gets my goat is restrictions on freedom of speech when no one is hurting another person or their property.
The point I'm trying to make is I think everyone should leave the group alone and let it grow on its' own. Oh well enough slobering and sorry if I hit a nerve.
>Subject: Re: "Locked Shop"
> >From: "Billy B. Edwards Jr." email@example.com
> >Date: 6/26/03 8:17 PM Eastern Daylight Time
> >Message-id: firstname.lastname@example.org
> >SCHLOSSLOCK wrote:
> >> "Security-Through-Obscurity" has always been a short-term strategy
> >> that has consistently failed in the long run. Technically astute
> >> people working in the security industry have been well aware of this
> >> for over 100 years (Ref. A. C. Hobbs, Locks and Safes: The
> >> Construction of Locks. Published by Virtue & Co., London, 1853). > >
> >Your reference is a little misleading since that argument was only
> >presented in the Preface written by Mr. Tomlinson and not by Mr. Hobbs.
> >Mr. Hobbs was able to defeat the Bramah lock because he was given
> >private access to it for 16 days and in that time determined its
> >construction well enough to defeat it. Had he not been able to do that,
> >the obscurity if the design would have defeated him. If you read the
> >entire book you may have also noted that Mr. Bramah implied that there
> >was some damage to the sliders during the picking process that should
> >have been discovered by the arbitrators had they bothered to try the
> >operating key.
> You missed the whole point.
> The erroneous belief that security depends upon keeping information about
> security systems and equipment out of the public domain has always been one of
> the principle tenets of most security occupations. This type of
> Security-Through-Obscurity, while partially effective, fails in the long run
> because "Oz" and its many "Wizards" are ultimately exposed.
> The only intelligent way to improve security is to play "devil's advocate" by
> openly discussing vulnerabilities. Defining weaknesses is the first step toward
> improvement. For example, failure to disclose to a customer the fact that
> masterkeyed conventional pin tumbler lock cylinders often can be easily raked
> open by a neophyte is clearly unethical. However, instead of using that fact as
> a basis for security improvement, locksmiths often attack anyone having the
> audacity to disclose security weaknesses A.K.A. "trade secrets." Twisted logic
> is often added to the defensive negative reaction by characterizing such
> disclosures as somehow undermining security and promoting crime. The negative
> reaction about Matt Blaze's recent article regarding masterkeyed locks is a
> typical example of the stupid "closed-shop" mentality that still prevails
> within this industry. Many lock and security equipment vulnerabilities have
> been well-known for hundreds of years. This whole industry needs to stop
> playing "I've got a secret" and focus on real security improvement!
> Security-Through-Obscurity is a naive short term information control tactic,
> and it NEVER WORKED as a long term effective physical security strategy! >
Your point is valid but as you know we're not in a perfect world where every building has high dollar Medeco or Multi-Lock locks on metal doors with metal frames and 2 inch thick plexiglass windows with a pit bull inside with a raw t bone in his food dish and another in his belly bone and all.
Buisness 101. You're only looking at one corner of the triangle, product quality. What about the cost of the quality and the demand that type of cost will impose on the consumer. Is the old lady on the corner with a fixed income able to afford that cost? No, but she can afford a cheaper lock. This same cheaper lock will have a means to be bypassed quickly if you know how to do it.
Therefore I agree with you but there is still nothing you or anyone else can do to make the situation better in the short run in the matter of security. Hence Security-Through-Obscurity is not naive but the only way to go.
If the average person knew what locksmiths know about grade 2 or 3 locks the lock companies that make them would go broke but the old lady STILL wouldn't be able to afford that Medeco.
Have a good day Glen