Medeco drilling.

Such a strongly worded response is not what one expects from Mr Edwards. I hope he's feeling well.

As to the points made in this post... First of all, it was BBE that said,

This implies that BBE thinks it can be done in 5 minutes using commonly available (carbide) bits. As BBE is an expert, I tend to take his word for such things. BBE implied that the test does not allow the use of carbide bits.

As for failing to comprehend, it was BBE that said that the original Medeco locks were not recalled/replaced because only 7 Lock Technology tools were sold, and they were somehow taken out of circulation. My point is that the outlawing of technology does not make the technology disappear. That point seems fairly clear.

I've never seen a locksmith on this forum say "The Medeco design is drill resistant for at least 15 minutes using limited tools." I've seen them say that they are a bear to drill, and they break bits doing it, and that they hate to waste a medeco cylinder. None of them seem to be saying that, with proper tools and skill, they can be drilled in less than

15 minutes.

When a facilities manager is working on a security plan, they really have to know these things so they can plan accordingly. All the locksmiths here will agree that the idea of a lock is to disuade a crook, or at least slow the crooks down enough to catch them. Some will even say that one of the lock's purpose is to simply provide proof of forceful entry.


Reply to
Loading thread data ...

You are right, my response was a little strong and you probably didn't deserve that. Some of that was probably due to my being upset with myself for making a typo that left the "1" out of the "15" in my original post. I type way to fast many times and obviously sometimes don't check twice before posting.

I went and looked, I didn't mention recall or replacing in my post. Here is what I said;

"Changes were made to the original product to defeat the Lock Technology tool within 30 days. Since the suit was won, only 7 tools were ever sold and they have all been accounted for, there is no need for the added expense of one of the changes that was made to defeat the tool and it has been discontinued, other changes are still in effect to this day."

That says that with one exception, changes that defeat that method of decoding are still in effect today. That is the point that you seem to have missed. The product made the technology go away because it no longer worked, the suit was so that everyone would know that the product was good enough to be defended. BBE.

Reply to
Billy B. Edwards Jr.

In any case since Medeco were successful in stopping the production and sale of the tool, there would have been no need to recall existing cylinders or warn users (except possibly maximum security Government or Military users) - they were not a 'safety hazard' as such and in any case would have been far more secure than the average six pin cylinder at the time.

Reply to

As someone who has worked as a maintenance technician for several years in many different commercil buildings I have only seen a few doorways that have been constructed adequately enough to repel an attacker with even basic hand tools for 15 minutes... Often times playing in the keyway of the lock (picking or drilling) takes A LOT longer than looking at the door and determining the weakest "point of entry"...

Case in point: I love it when I see a Medeco cylinder installed in a door built into a standard commercial-type wall like you would find in the typical office environment... It doesn't take any fancy tools to open the door, only a prior knowledge of its width and a bit of creativity to open the door...

To address your concerns of the facilities manager developing a security plan, he or she will not rely only on "high security" locks... In fact a majority of the time they will opt for some kind of I/C system which allows for unskilled personnel to immediately rekey locks in the event of a lost key...

I wonder what you mean by "proof of forced entry" as an idea, I don't see anything mentioned in any of the books I have read so far about Criminal Investigation that even remotely or indirectly describes the process of forensic locksmithing which would be the only way to truly prove the kind of forced entry you are implying... Tool marks on the door are usually more than enough to prove forcible entry was made...

Often times a "security plan" is developed only to satisfy the requirements of an insurance company... The type of door lock used doesn't matter if there is a system in place to log the name of every person who comes and goes from the building... Contracted security personnel are usually hired on only to monitor the building and to take some of the burden on their insurance in the event something ever goes wrong...

Evan, ~~formerly a maintenance man, now a college student

Reply to

That's more an insurance issue than a legal issue. Insurance often won't pay if there isn't evidence that the entry was unauthorized. So, yes,

Again: Security is relative, not absolute. Understand your real needs and engineer a solution which addresses them efficiently. A locksmith can help you ask the right questions and come up with practical answers.

Reply to
Joe Kesselman (address as shown

Insurance will not pay on a lot of things that people think they will..

had an example here long years back.. the 'story' guy breaks into a house, holds the homeowner at gun point and takes a nail gun, and staples his feet to the stair floor, then sets house on fire..

ok, sounds ok..

Fire marshalls did NOT agree with his story.. so, as long as the fire marshall said its questionable, they refused to pay on damage to the house.. 10 years later, I got a call to come look at the house in question (at that time I was a building inspector for the city) it had just been sold at auction by the county and the new owner wanted to 'fix/rebuild it' the insurance company NEVER did pay a penny on it..

same case here.. NO damage trail?? too bad.. door kicked OUT? with no ENTRANCE? too bad.. (seen that happen too-dumb crook)

'things missing', and several keys are out? too bad..


Reply to

Similar to small Abloy padlocks which are not that strong but almost impossible to open 'cleanly' without the proper key. Also why the British Government was keen to see un unpickable lock developed - so that 'clean' entry into Buckingham Palace dispatch boxes or 'clean' operation of Excise padlocked valves in distilleries, etc was not possible.

Reply to

No, you drill the screws that hold the lockset on, only because you dont want to mess with the medco cylinder before lunchtime, and if its after lunch, you drill the screws that hold the lockset on. If the medco cylinders on a safe, get a chair, you'll be working on it for awhile.

Reply to

got lucky once, had a Medeco on a file cabinet, 5 minutes and it was OUT.. HOWEVER, the cabinet WAS to be tossed out and it didnt matter HOW it came out.


Reply to

PolyTech Forum website is not affiliated with any of the manufacturers or service providers discussed here. All logos and trade names are the property of their respective owners.