Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.

Picking locks?

Collapse
X
 
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

  • Picking locks?

    I am new here. What is the facination with picking locks? It would be cool to know how to do it agreed but what's the practical application? Don't send me to fucktard hell!

  • #2
    Originally posted by Arya
    I am new here. What is the facination with picking locks? It would be cool to know how to do it agreed but what's the practical application? Don't send me to fucktard hell!
    Most books on computer security (that I have read) from a general perspective write on the differences between a "flat" security model versus a "layered" security model.

    When you consider (the better) "layered" security model, you will likely start to modularize areas into logical parts. One of these is often considered Physical Security, and is one of the most important parts to security, as it is often the foundation to all [most] other parts. Many models include the assumption that physical security will be restricted to authorized and trusted users. Violation of that layer often breaks many security models.

    Locks are just one aspect to physical security. Locks also provide excellent parallels for helping someone to understand other areas of computer security such as cryptography and a few others. By getting educated on lock bypass techniques, attackers can gain access to spaces more easily. By getting educated on locks, defenders can make more informed purchases when they build their physical "castle."

    Lockpicking demos have been done every single year since I can recall and in some years, there has been more than one presentation on lock picking. These are also on Video AFAIK.

    Why are you dead-set on doing a documentary on things related to hacking?

    [Edited addition appear above in [ ] ]
    Last edited by TheCotMan; June 5, 2004, 22:57. Reason: added content, fixed grammatical error

    Comment


    • #3
      "Why are you dead-set on doing a documentary on things related to hacking?"



      I am not dead set as I mentioned the idea is in it's infancy. I personally find internet security facinating but from the responces I have had it seems to have been covered. I just find it interesting that most people in the western world have metaphoricaly taken all their information and put it in a box in their front yard. I help freinds with basic computer problems and almost all of them have not even a clue. It also stands to reason that most people on a forum like this are reasonably intelligent and might have good insight into a tech topic. I am just tossing ideas around.

      Comment


      • #4
        Now I get the lock picking reasoning.

        Comment


        • #5
          I am not dead set as I mentioned the idea is in it's infancy...
          Well, maybe others will submit opinions different from the ones expressed so far.

          Good luck.

          Comment


          • #6
            For myself: partially it's because of the puzzle nature of lock picking. The other part is practical knowledge of knowing for yourself what makes one lock better than another.

            Opening a lock without a key is a great puzzle. It's just a more complex version of those 'get the ring off the string and wood' type puzzles. Great party trick too.

            The practical side is usually related to securing the rest of an office, not just the computers. All to often I see server rooms with nothing more than a light door lock (or sometimes none at all) protecting valuable data from sticky fingers. Imagine how easy it would be to slip into an office, and pop a hot-swap drive out and walk out with several hundred gigs of data, rather than trying to D/L it.

            It's also been useful for those inevitable times when you need to get into a cabinet/desk/office and no-one knows where the key is, or the person responsibe is on vacation.

            Computer security does'nt stop at the keyboard.
            Never drink anything larger than your head!





            Comment


            • #7
              Originally posted by renderman
              It's also been useful for those inevitable times when you need to get into a cabinet/desk/office and no-one knows where the key is, or the person responsibe is on vacation.
              Then again, those are the times where you may or may not want to reveal your skill to the rest of your cow orkers. It may raise unneeded questions, but I suppose is all depends on what's inside the cabinet whether you should or not.
              Where's the dedication?

              Comment


              • #8
                Originally posted by TwinVega
                Then again, those are the times where you may or may not want to reveal your skill to the rest of your cow orkers. It may raise unneeded questions, but I suppose is all depends on what's inside the cabinet whether you should or not.
                Those people who do well with documentaries generally try to avoid being confrontational by asking questions which are loaded with content designed to have the person being interviewed question their own actions; this is the kind of thing that you find from "investigative journalists" who have an idea for a story they want to deliver and will direct people through specific questions to say what is desired by the reporter instead of just reporting what is freely offered. Keywords "manufacturing news" comes to mind.

                Some of the best documentaries I have seen are ones where the person asking the questions drops all sense of moratily, ethics, and judgement. They have questions designed to get to raw information and new questions are formed based on the content which is freely offered.

                People could learn a lot by following the teaching of many anthropologists on how to get effective information when working ethnographies in the field. In this kind of work, the person asking the questions does as little as possible to include content in questions which suggest any desired answer, but instead let the person speak on the things which they find of interest or excitment.

                [Edit: Added content below:]

                I know you are not the same person as the original poster, but the question reminded me of a problem I have observed in some "documentaries." :-/
                Last edited by TheCotMan; June 6, 2004, 10:08. Reason: added content to clarify, fix typos

                Comment


                • #9
                  Originally posted by Arya
                  I just find it interesting that most people in the western world have metaphoricaly taken all their information and put it in a box in their front yard.
                  Metaphorically speaking, my box is buried under the back patio along with those nurses that went missing in 1997.

                  Comment


                  • #10
                    Aahahaha. re: nurses. I think maybe defining what a documentary is would be helpfull. The formal doc is the one your talking about and yes it's straight information no judgement then organize it in a linear thread with basic story composition, begining middle end. In the end you ARE telling a story. Otherwise just read stats and be done with it. Personaly I am very opinionated. I don't know that anything I might make would not be MY opinion on said subject done with objectivity very much in mind and an openess to any conclusion. It's not written before it's shot. It's shot, then it becomes what it becomes. That is just my personal style. Maybe thats not a formal doc but if you go to festivals it's a kind of doc. If something pisses me off it's going to make it into anything I make. Same with sad or interesting or stupid. I get too involved I think to make a formal doc I think, and to not get involved would mean doing a doc on something I didn't care about which leads to why make it. ( for me)

                    Comment


                    • #11
                      Originally posted by Arya
                      In the end you ARE telling a story. Otherwise just read stats and be done with it. Personaly I am very opinionated.
                      And this is one of my biggest gripes with reporters, the press and people who work for these tabloids. Through the process of clever edits, and extraction of phrases out of context, an opinion of the person editing the story is created, and the work is less a pieces about "the culture" and more a piece about "how the editor perceives the culture."

                      I'm just glad I was able to learn this through observation of how others have been treated by people from the media in finalized media products.

                      This being wayyyyy off topic, but included as an example. "Ken Burns 'Jazz'" is a pretty good example of including a story which includes pure facts from history, general opinion from the editor (which seems to be stated in ways to make it obvious that they were from the editor/creator of the series) and opinions from people who play or compose. This series is on par with "Nerds" and "Nerds 2.0.1" as an informative works with opinions included, but signposts to make identification of each very simple for the viewer. Multiple opinions are offered-- even when they differ what appears to be the opinion of the editor. Restating the important part: it is easy for the viewer to know which is opinion and which is fact.

                      An example of a film which included *tons* of research and many attempts to include historical facts (more entertainment than education) is "Tora Tora Tora" which I consider one of the better war films made; a rare instance in US war film where Americans are not shown to be some sort of elite master-race and the enemy as a race which should undergo genocide. (Well, maybe they are not all *that* bad, but some fell like this.)

                      A certain percentage of people who attend DC (which seems to grow larger every year) are the "wanna-be-a-hacker-but-don't-wanna-learn-stuff" who try to talk like they know something, but really do not. When people from the media get ahold of people in this group, it is a sad, sad day for everyone. There are people who have chosen to make a statement with hairstyle, body piercings, or other attention-getters and people from the media seem fit to use this small precent of DC attendees as representatives of the whole. (Some of these people have skills and some do not.) There are a percentage (larger) who may (or may not) wear odd clothing just for the con, but have a demeanor which you might find in any normal office building or tech department. Some of these are people who work in phone companies, Tech support, help desk, programmers "something-something" certified, people with degrees, or other education... for all you know, the person you see at the con could be a "FedEx driver from Canada" or have some other job. There are people who may or may not have skills who just go up to hang out with friends, and others who see it as yet-another-exuse to get drunk. Some go to share, and/or learn, and some attend just so that the goon "enforcers" are kept busy.

                      The points are these, don't be like others and only cover one group of people and use that to represent a larger whole. Be accurate. Be complete. Verify your facts. If you must include your opinion, then don't use other's statements (out of context) to demonstrate your opnion, but instead use the actions you capture on film to do this. Don't sensationalize small things into larger things....

                      [joke]
                      (Speaking to the camera operator)
                      "Oh! They have changed the color of the fountain to RED!... Ahem! Take 1. 'These Communist Hackers strike fear in the hearts of attendees at this hacker conference as they apply their elite skills of fountain-dye to represent for their home country.' "
                      [/joke]

                      Comment


                      • #12
                        Your beef sounds like objectivity and passing off opinion as fact. I agree that objectivity is key and as for opinion; it's just that and THAT should be made clear. The bullshit of editing out of context comes down to integrity. You can make anyone say anything, I edit, it's shocking what you can do with a seemingly harmless statement couched in out of context material. It comes down to integrity and honesty. Fox news! unbias and balanced! AHAHAHAHAHAHAHA! The really sad part is the average joe doesn't see the twisting of facts but then again the average IQ is 100. Such is life.

                        Comment

                        Working...
                        X