He started as a lock collector, but more and more Han Fey is asked by the industry to shed his light on development issues and review their design. And write articles to give his honest view on their products.
Han just finished an in depth document on the Robotic Key System. As always a masterpiece, filled with many technical bits of information you will find nowhere else.
The Robotic Key System is an interesting mixture of techniques. It combines the reliable mechanical disc lock system with some pretty clever electronics to align the discs and dial the correct combination. It brings key management to a completely new level.
Some people will recognize this system as the one we tested and looked at at the Dutch Open 2006 in Sneek. Some video is still available online on this site about this intriguing lock.
For those of you in the lock industry that read my weblog: Here is a nice opportunity!
The inventors of this lockingsystem, Stantonconcepts.us, is looking for a “strategic partner” to turn this wonderful idea into a commercial success…
Read all technical details on: http://toool.nl/RKS-principle.pdf (PDF, 3 MB)
Interesting stuff. There must be a lot of applications for this kind of technology. There must be a gazillion other ways to safely transport key combination, from a piece of paper with an encrypted combination to smart cards. Cool.
On page 33, I see only discussion of capturing the motion of the dialer using a video camera. What about a determining the combination with a timing attack using a directional microphone or EM radio signature? I suppose the stepping motor and electronics causes quite a bit of (EM) noise, especially during the direction changes?
They might want to think of a new name. System RKS is a chubb brand name, and maybe a registered trade mark ..
Not for the same thing though, it is for a restricted key system for lever locks.
Interesting product, would be interesting to see it in production.
Pascal thank you for your comments. Also on page 33 there are discussions about surreptitiously capturing opening information via sensitive audio and or electro magnetic emmision receiving instruments. These are real attacks scenarios and this equipment is sophisticated and sensitive and developing all the time. To thwart these attack methods the robotic dialer could electro magnetically shielded to minimize emissions, it could also be designed to emit acoustic and em noise to mask the operation.
I saw this lock at Sneek.
It was impressive on the first look.
After 5 minutes with the lock i found out a worriying compromise that was not only a design floor but would also allow anyone to quickly and reliably open the lock everytime with ease once shown how to do it.
I opened the lock shown at sneek 4 times useing my technique within a 5 minute period.
I notice there is no mention of it in Hans article so assume the method has still not been discovered by anyone else.
The supprising thing to me was that on trying to explain this fault the person who brought the lock didnt want to know and was actually quite rude to me, i know Marc was with the guy so attemted to talk to marc but he kept getting side tracked.
What i will do is the same as is done here, in the time honoured fashion that Barry and toool do i will await the release of the lock and then i shall make a video of the defeat and explain fully how to do it with a picture of the simple tool you need to make (i made mine in 30 seconds) and then i shall post it on the internet for all to see.
Maybe i could suggest in the future, that is if any lock makers are reading this, that if someone comes up to you and offers to show you fault with your latest product and not only offers the technique and tool to do it but also a modifacation in which the issue could easily and quickly be solved i suggest you listen and at least have a discussion, dont just say youve got better things to do and are not interested in any such thing as its too late to change the design.
Or maybe thats how lock makers work and are only interested in the money?
I wish this lock well, it has potential but unless the flaw is fixed within a few hours of its release anyone wanting to know how to defeat it will be able to get all the info they want via the internet.
Nice lock but it contains no security whatsoever as is and that being released onto the market is a worrying thing.
PW:
> What i will do is the same as is done here, in the time honored
> fashion that Barry and toool do i will await the release of the lock
> and then i shall make a video of the defeat and explain fully how to
> do it with a picture of the simple tool you need to make (i made mine
> in 30 seconds) and then i shall post it on the internet for all to see.
I am real sorry to hear you were not taken seriously in Sneek by the
designer of the lock. But what you are doing here is pretty serious.
You mention a flaw in public, teasing everybody with it and not go
public on the details.
I do not recall ever to have done that. You either tell something
fully, or you don’t tell it at all.
Again, I regret to hear they did not take you serious, but I would
love to hear how you think you can open the lock. Personally I think
it is a pretty solid design and can’t see the flaw …
Please enlighten us (and don’t tease us đ
Hi PW,
I tested the RKS-principle carefully, just like I do with all the locks I get for testing. The RKS cylinder has also been assessed by top US agencies and just like me, no vulnerabilities were identified. The issue of scrambling the discs after being opened is important and the prototype presented at Sneek did not have this important feature. Maybe you refer to this, but there are many possible ways of doing this, as you can read in the article.
I always love to meet people who have more technical insight about locks as I have, and invite you therefore to ALOA 2007 in Charlotte, were I have a booth. You are invited to manipulate this lock, as you can see on page 25 of the RKS-principle article. If you really succeed in opening this lock confirm the experiences you had before, your ticket and all expenses will be paid by me personally.
I know the inventor of the lock, John Loughlin personaly and I cannot imagine that he was rude in Sneek. But however, I am really looking forward to meet you again.
Han Fey
“I do not recall ever to have done that. You either tell something
fully, or you donââŹâ˘t tell it at all.”
Then i choose to not tell at all.
Paul,
On behalf of people we trusted, you were one of the few people that we
let into the closed section of the Dutch Open 2006. We offered you our
hospitality and a good time, and we did not notice any negative
feelings regarding the Sneek weekend from you at all. Even better, you
thanked us many times for the good time and fun you and your two
friends had.
Your first posting on the RKS topic was a very mean one. Or maybe the
right word for that is sneaky.
First of all you accuse me/us of waiting to release vulnerabilities on
locks until they are in production. I would like to ask you to give
only one (1) example of this. Just one….
Truth is we do lots of research for lock companies and it is quite the
contrary of what you accuse us from.
Second you completely drag a product trough the mud, because you feel
you were not taken serious by the maker. The only motive you seem to
have to do this is anger because you felt humiliated not to be taken
seriously. To be honest I think this is all between your ears and not
based on any real facts. And I do not think you have a real attack
against this system. Maybe a theoretical one, but I would love to see
you show up at Aloa and prove your claim to be able to open their demo
lock. What have you got to loose? All expenses will be paid for you.
Or are you afraid you are not as smart as you think?
All in all I can say that looking at the people that introduced you to
us, I expected a much more professional attitude from you. But anger
and bitterness seem to have taken over and your professional attitude
is far gone.
Accusing us of something is one thing, doing the same thing you accuse
others off is plain childish and definitely not professional.
All the best,
Barry
Hi Paul,
I like it if people say that they can open locks which I have tested and of which I say that they can not be opened. This means that I have made a mistake and I can learn from that.
What I do not like are people who claim that they can open these locks and then they are talking non-sense. Of course I do not know if you are talking non-sense, but there is a way to proof that.
I saw on Lockpicking101, that you claim that there is a bumpkey for the Geminy shield. I invite you for the second time to visit ALOA 2007 and bump open, the Geminy shield. Last year there was a fee from 500 or 1000 USD if somebody managed to open this shield. The American Toool champion, thought he would do it in a short time. After 2,5 hours he said, almost there, almost there … At the end of the show he got the lock with him to try it at home. Still without succes!!!
These are facts. I like facts, no Bull-shit.
For you I make an exception and if you visit my ALOA booth (for the RKS-lock) and open the Geminy shield with a bumpkey you get that 1000 USD, without a problem. If you need parts to make the bumpkey, I will be willing to send you these. If you need the bumpkey you saw in Sneek I will arrange that too.
It’s what you have said, against what I have written. Show me the value of all the remarks you make about manipulation locks in the different Blogs you write in.
In ALOA I will also show an upgraded simple 6-pin Deadbolt pin tumbler cylinder, with ordinary pins. No sidebar in the lock, no rotating pins, etc. I claim that this lock is manipulation proof. I have tested this lock on all possible ways which came up in Barry’s mind and my mind, maybe Barry will tell something about this testing in a next Blog.
For this lock I do not need your help, because in my opinion this lock is also ok. The idea how to improve the lock came in 5 minutes, the production took 5 minutes. I give you 5 full weeks to manipulate it.
You get insight information of the complete working of the system and you get all parts which are in the lock. You get blanks if you want to impressioning the lock, etc. The only thing you do not know are the lenght of the correct combination pins in the lock. Seems fair to me.
If you succeed you get the 3-0’s again. What is holding you up?
As they say in England, “put up or shut up”.
Han Fey Lock Technologies
Wow, wrong id code and it has just wiped 2 hours of text so i refuse to try and retype,
Basicaly i agree in someway that mood affected the way i wrote and maybe i came across a bit harsh,
Picking locks is not my hobby nor do i find it fun so really do not need or want a name for myself on picking them and nor do i care if im accused of being unable to pick them,
Ive never worked on a geminy nor said i have, i said they were bumpable and have seen the tool for doing it so how am i in the wrong if those at sneek chose to lie to me? i was shown a bump tool for one and told it bumped them open, what else am i to believe? if you dont add comment when its mentioned elsewhere how is anyone to know differantly?
I have no intertest in making a name for myself on picking locks, i dont brag about picking locks and have never even made as much of a video of me picking pin locks, it doesnt interest me to be the one to pick lock X when others cant, it more interests me to tell others how to pick lock X, and so that is the reason i dont want to fly halfway across the world to pick a dam lock, its simply not my idea of fun,
If you dont break locks before they are on the market then i appolagise but thats how you come across not only to me but a lot of others,
This very blog upsets a lot of people including the ones who reccomended me to sneek because of the info you so readily post up, i think you must have come across wrong on what your ethics are but whenever asked you simply put it out of the discussion, at the moment a lot of people beleive thats what you are about and what you do is to release lock issues not only before production (ok i accept now this could be wrong) but also release details on locks already in use which causes either cost for replacement or worry due to cost of replacement and breakin (unless that is also wrong) to the owners of said locks and that in nmy mind is the worse thing you can do,
For you to bring other forums into this is wrong as you choose to not participate in them, if you did this particular issue wouldnt have even arrose, its fine reading them and getting upset but if you never question or comment you dont get a right to reply,
You mention other blogs? i assure you this is the one and only blog ive ever posted on and this will also be the last,
You two are just pissed that you think i didnt allow you on my personal forum and your constant emails to me show that, in reality you have been sent numourus and i mean at least over 20 emails and pms etc etc telling you your passwords and how to get on site etc but choose to ignore them, i cant come over and do it for you but maybe thats what you expected,
I didnt post imediate responce to your comments because i didnt see them, i dont come here much maybe once a month if that so hadnt seen them nor do i especially want to get into petty and personal arguments on a blog, i admit i was harsh about this lock a little but other than saying the owner was rude to me which is fact i never brought personal issues into it like you have,
This is going nowhere, ive no interest myself to come to america to pick a lock, if i did it as a hobby or for fun i might very well do but i dont so i wont, sneek did somthing to me i think, it made me realise i do this as a living and nothing more, i dont do it for any sort of fun nor do i get any from it, i wasnt goign to attend sneek again even if i was welcome which i assume i am not,
Barry, thanks for keeping your word to me in that i will remain anonymous on this blog, NOT, i want you to remove the videos you have of me on here as they are no longer welcome to be viewed,
Dear Paul,
It is a pity your original reply was lost, but I do think you answering
two posts at the same time makes reading and replying to it a little
difficult.
On the contrarily of what you want others to believe we have excellent
relationship with most European lock manufacturers. And even with some
outside the EU. They all seem to respect our code of ethics and
knowledge base. After all, would they send us locks and even involve
us in their production process if we were not trustworthy?
And trust is what this is all about. In this case a lock manufacturer
travels halve the globe and comes to Sneek to show us his lock. Based
on our reputation of being competent, trustworthy people. People that
are open about security and do not believe in ‘security trough
obscurity’ and can ‘think outside the box’. By showing us his cutaway
models and sharing his design specification he put faith in us. He
trusted us to be responsible with the information and tell him if we
had concerns about his design. In other words he made quite an effort
to travel a long way to show us this lock and learn from us.
And he did learn, as many people talked lengthily about ways to
theoretical attack this system. But nobody came with an attack that in
your own words “was not only a design floor but would also allow
anyone to quickly and reliably open the lock everytime with ease once
shown how to do it”.
By making such statements on this public forum you did severely damage
our reputation.
After all, what other lock manufacturer is going to show us their
locks before production if there are people like you at our meetings
that afterwards publicly claim (again, in your own words) “it contains
no security whatsoever as is and that being released onto the market
is a worrying thing”.
And I am not even talking about the reputation damage to the lock and
it’s poor maker(s). Try find an investor for your invention when
statements like the one you made are floating around on the web.
All in all I can not say how disappointed I am in you by doing all
this.
Maybe it’s time for you to repair all this damage and tell us your
concerns about the RKS system?
I must apologise as I have again hit a button by mistake and removed an hours of typing so will make a brief post on the same lines without the musings,
I haven’t done anything wrong other than express my opinion which is what I thought this blog was about, after re-reading a lot of it I have the opinion that any negative comment gets treated this way and the person making it ostracised,
With respect this has little to do with you other than its on your blog, I can not see how in anyway a statement made by myself that I know as fact and you cant prove otherwise can be seen as something offensive coming from you or your business, so caused harm? I very much doubt it,
I agree arguments and discussions are a way of life industrially but you took it to a personal level which I have not, its true I stated the person with the lock at sneek was rude to me and that is fact and remains unchanged why then can I not say this to anyone? if its because you speak to him or liked the lock? then that’s poor show my friend, sticking up for people is fine, I do it a lot but to do it with a lie is wrong,
I was answering your messages not the other way around, it was you two who brought into the pot all the other postings on other sites, it was I who found it hard to answer your responses as I didn’t know where you had got what from where on the net, if im not asked about other postings I wont reply to the questions reagrding other postings simple as that,
Is it not right that when a lock maker sends you locks that you look into them, try and crack them and then report back to the maker with feedback but when a maker doesn’t send you a lock or refuses for you to be able to test a lock you then take it on yourself to crack the lock and then release opening info on it? that is what I think you do along with a lot of other people including some manufacturers ive spoken to, if that’s wrong im sorry for thinking that please please put us all right,
I haven’t done any damage to anything, your the ones trying to discredit me so that it seems my comments aren’t worthy or of note and I can handle that but please do not dress it up as anything more, I made quick albeit badly typed, statements, you prove me wrong instead of me proving myself right, as I say I don’t care whether im believed or not but you do seem to mind so by all means carry on and make me the worse than the Russians if you want but I shall not backtrack for the sake of good context,
“They all seem to respect our code of ethics and
knowledge base. ”
And yet you still refuse to actually in public come out and either remind those of us who have forgotten or tell those of us who simply do not know what these working practices or business ethic are, not that I personally am really interested but as you bring mine into it I would assume you would have re/stated your own but instead all you have done is to ask for me to prove where ive read you work the way I believed you did, I agree you don’t need or should have to explain yourself but your making me do it so why not you, an example i could bring up is that you didnt agree with multipick selling bumpkeys so went on tv and said so, not only telling the general public where to buy ready made keys but also nameing and shaming multipick, how do you think that affected them? ill tell you, they had to remove the sale of said keys and that was your doing so i dont see any differance, if im wrong on this i appolagise again but ive aksed you more than once about that and all times youve either ignored the question or simply skirted around it if we arent given answers we have to make assumptions on things,
“In other words he made quite an effort
to travel a long way to show us this lock and learn from us.”
So did all the other people who visited from another country, personally I drove 13 hours solid to get to Amsterdam then carried on the next day to sneek with all the travelling and time that envolved also as I picked up and brought someone else for you im sure my journey was far more complicated and tiring than jumping on a plane from America, I appreciate he didn’t have to come but it was for personal gain so why wouldn’t he, its true he travelled that distance for what you say but made no effort to listen to a no-body stood infront of him saying he’s just opened his lock, hmm some learning curve that must be, but to do it for ‘us’ at sneek is far from the truth, it was personal gain so dont pretend it was somthing more, he was there to delelop or show off his lock,
Its true that he could have been ill and wanting to rush to the toilet or was in a bad mood or had other things to do etc etc but I stated a fact as part of my posting and I do not apologise for telling the truth, he was rude to me and didn’t want to listen, end off story,
“And he did learn, as many people talked lengthily about ways to
theoretical attack this system. But nobody came with an attack that in
your own words ââŹĹwas not only a design floor but would also allow
anyone to quickly and reliably open the lock everytime with ease once
shown how to do itââŹÂ.”
How can you state this? was you holding his hand every step of the way? did you have a listening device on him at all times? this is total bull Barry and you know it either that or your openly calling me a liar and accusing me of making this stuff up which I believe ive already explained is so far from the truth its funny, I couldn’t careless if its known or not, im not after any sort of name regarding picking locks except to prove it to myself so its of no concern to me but to state something you know not to be true (or cant prove to be untrue) is a little naughty isn’t it? at least I made a statement that is true, I went to the guy having opened his lock and he didn’t want to know, you are only surmising that I didn’t do that and that is what your argument is about right now, again this is a little part of your influencing your readership by telling them in a roundabout way that im lying, its wrong, you ask and make sure that im thinking of everything I now write to make sure everything is fact and thought through so that im not picked up on it but you don’t seem to be doing the same hence why I can pull you up on this, if you want me to play by your rules then you must also play by the rules, this statement is incorrect as the person with the lock was shown or at least attempted to be shown a method that opened it,
“By making such statements on this public forum you did severely damage
our reputation.”
Earth to Barry calling, earth to Barry,
You set this blog up for there never to be an angry word? never an opinion made that you don’t agree with? never something to be mentioned you don’t agree with?
Hurt your reputation? what a load of crap and you know it, the statement that I have come up with a way to defeat a lock that you like but along the way rightly or wrongly made a statement saying I was treated rudely by the person with it has no bearing at all on what is thought of this site, you or toool,
If this blog is purely for people who agree with you all of the time and will always write that then it should be made clear on the opening page, perhaps a line such as “We accept any discussion as long as its in agreeance with the sites owner and doesn’t go against anything the sites owner believes to be true, if you post up anything that is not in agreeance the owners will try every possible way to discredit the poster not only publicly but privately whether correct or not” would make things a bit clearer and I wouldn’t have posted in the first place,
A main stream public forum would be LP101 where I am sure you have noticed no such posts have been made on the threads regarding this lock, this blog I assume is used mainly by hobby pickers rather than the general public, its true I wouldn’t go reading a washing machine forum as its nothing to do with anything I do so im sure ‘the general public’ are not regular visitors to site unless you’ve mentioned it in one of your TV spots, either way I doubt even if someone not in the know upon reading this would know what were on about anyway BUT your the one with the delete button if it was such an issue why leave the posts on site?
I agree then that perhaps I shouldn’t have brought my own personal feelings into this as in how I was treated or perceived to be treated and rather should have either said nothing (all the posts saying how great it is and how good it will be in use etc made sure not posting for me wasn’t an option as I cant hold my tongue for long) or simply said something like I opened the lock at sneek, I used a bit of a sarcastic stance in my initial post which has been totally missed but I wrote what I wrote and stand by it, the two comments were however detached and the opening of the lock statement was not connected to the rudeness statement, if he was rude but i couldnt have opened he lock i wouldnt lie and say i did anyway and in the same respect i wouldnt say he was rude to me because i had opened his lock,
“After all, what other lock manufacturer is going to show us their
locks before production if there are people like you at our meetings
that afterwards publicly claim (again, in your own words) ââŹĹit contains
no security whatsoever as is and that being released onto the market
is a worrying thingââŹÂ.”
Well the answer to that one Barry is the exact same people who do it now, right now you get the makers who know their product to be good and those that only come to you that know you wont find fault, the ones that do not come to you will not stop coming to you as they don’t already, those that don’t know or want you, wont but those that do, will do no matter what’s said on here by someone unrelated to your business,
On the same note you don’t seem to care what damage your doing to my reputation etc because of this thread so there’s two sides to it, were all in business and some of us more so involved than others like to think,
“And I am not even talking about the reputation damage to the lock and
itââŹâ˘s poor maker(s). Try find an investor for your invention when
statements like the one you made are floating around on the web.”
I do and have tried after people such as yourself have tried to discredit me/my name, its not imposable by any means, if the product is good it will sell regardless of what a single voice has to say,
You also say ‘statements like mine floating around the web’, well Barry its you who has copied it elsewhere then as ive only posted that comment here,
“All in all I can not say how disappointed I am in you by doing all
this.”
You don’t know me or the person I am so this statement has no bearing on me whatsoever, its like telling a kid your upset he spat on the floor, who cares? the kid will only care if its his dad telling him off as the stranger in the streets opinion doesnt mean anythign to him,
“Maybe itââŹâ˘s time for you to repair all this damage and tell us your
concerns about the RKS system?”
LOL I don’t think so, as I say what damage?? you think after this im going to be goaded into telling you anyway?
Nope think again,
What I have chosen to do is to copyright my tool idea, I will then await the release of this lock, I will then make and sell a tool for opening this lock to locksmiths who want one should the same opening still work,
Therefore it is not in my interest to mention any further the technique, tool or whatever behind my statements,
As regards damage etc then I suggest its you and han who has kicked this off, I agree my perhaps poorly constructed posting gave cause for comment somewhere but it was you two who chose to then attack me and carry the argument on in ‘public’, you have the edit/delete button not I so if its that worrying the post could simply have been removed and then message me privately about it to which to be honest I would have gone into discussion with you on what I found with the lock and what I made, instead you chose to try and damage myself by carrying it on here, a tactic I believe has failed if the emails ive had regarding this are anything to go by, I think you would be surprised with the support I have and that is the only reason I come back to respond again,
I will however ask/mention one thing as long as its not taken as being nasty, having a go, insulting the lock maker, insulting toool, insulting you two, insulting your readership, annoying the investors, damaging to the lock maker or designer, damaging to the site, the internet the world,
The lock shown at sneek was very week to the point that I think a screwdriver with hex drive would easily break the lock and a lock breaker would eat them up like they were made from paper,
Has this issue been sorted out because in the state it was at sneek (I understand it wasn’t a production model) there was no physical attack security at all and it seemed that if you could see the front of the lock you could break it with very little effort?,
Now im not running away but I feel this is getting nowhere except upsetting all those involved, I cant ask you to do anything nor would I try to but I suggest that if your not happy about what’s been said because what was said goes against what you think then I suggest you simply delete the comments from my first post down, you can always do that when you remove the videos of myself I do not want you to display on site anymore,
Other than that I shall not be responding again so go ahead and try to drag my name through the mud to try and discredit the FACT that ive opened this lock, it doesn’t matter really in any context to me as ive already said, to all those who have emailed me – thanks for your support but I suggest if you have issues with Barry or Han that you mail them directly I will not fight battles on your behalf but the notes of encouragement were nice and I thankyou but ask for them to stop as my inbox cant cope lol,
Hi Paul W.,
No long reply from me, just a short remark, because I am not a man from many words, so “Just stick to the point”
You started with telling that you can manipulate the RKS lock.
If you are a man of word and of truth, how about this: I send you a padlock with the RKS-system in it. It will be an Abloy PL656 or an heavy Anchor Las.
I send it closed, you send it back open, without damage. You do not have to tell how you did it, but just send the lock, open and undamaged back, this to demonstrate the value of you words in all the blogs you write in. All costs will be paid by me.
Then you have proven your point. I am curious if you are man enough to accept this.
Han Fey
The Netherlands
I said i wouldnt post or look this blog up again but i did wonder how long is was going to take for this offer to materialise, well done for being big enough to offer it,
Its not about being a man and thats a funny thing to state, lockpicking must obviously be more to you than everyone else if you think it makes you a man or not but there you go,
Send me the lock and i will show it open, i can not send it back intact but i can take pictures (as many as you want) to proove the lock was opened but then i would have to destroy the lock so that when you recieve it back there is no lock in there for you to forensicly examine to determine my method of opening,
Those are my terms and i will not do it any other way, as i plan to make and sell a toool i will not let the lock be examined afterwards to work the technique out (which is very possable),
I am sure that you will understand the reasoning with this and if your man enough by all means send me the lock and ill show it open but i assure you it wont be useable when you get it back so please make sure your happy with that detail before carrying forward,
Im sure a man of your stature understands this but just to clarify incase youve misunderstood anything,
Send me the lock and i will open it,
I will send it back of course but the lock will be drilled out so no-one can work out my opening technique,
Ps, you obviously havent read or understood my previous postings so when you contact me i would like you to explain this statement “this to demonstrate the value of you words in all the blogs you write in”
I dont need to proove jack to you or anyone else for a start as ive already said but i want to know what these other blogs are because ive already told you i dont post on any (nor visit any) which youve decided to ignore so would like to hear privately where you think i post,
Also if you continue to host the videos i was promised that could be removed on my say so at anytime then i shall retract my offer of opening the lock for you,
Dear Paul,
“I haven’t done anything wrong other than express my opinion”
It is not your opinion that is the problem. As a matter of fact I like
to openly discuss things. But your first posting was a very
provocative one. And I strongly believe you knew at forehand it would
be the beginning of a long series of postings.
“its true I stated the person with the lock at sneek was rude to me
and that is fact”
I never questioned you felt mistreated. But I do think a lot of it is
between your ears.
“I haven?t done any damage to anything, your the ones trying to
discredit me”
Now this is what I call turning things around. Please read your
original first two postings again and see who is discrediting who.
“so that it seems my comments aren’t worthy or of note”
Where did you get this idea? I took your comments very serious and
kindly asked not to tease us by not telling how you bypassed the lock.
I think for the readers of this blog it is perfectly clear you are
just trying to damage someone who you feel mistreated you and starting
up a never ending negative discussion that will stick to his product.
And you seem to do a pretty good job at that.
“and I can handle that but please do not dress it up as anything more”
I stick to my analysis of your first posts. It was meant to hurt,
provoke and do as much damage to the lock and this blog as possible.
“an example i could bring up is that you didnt agree with multipick
selling bumpkeys so went on tv and said so – not only telling the
general public where to buy ready made keys but also nameing and
shaming multipick, how do you think that affected them?”
You are now dragging bumpkeys into this discussion. This is a
completely different subject and I will let it rest for the moment.
There is plenty of text to type without dragging that in.
“at least I made a statement that is true, I went to the guy having
opened his lock and he didn?t want to know, you are only surmising
that I didn?t do that and that is what your argument is about right
now”
I never questioned the fact you opened the lock. As a matter of fact I
did repeatedly ask you to share your concerns. But being the clever
provocateur you are you only put fuel to the fire, and not trying to
pour some water over it. I do doubt your attack will open this lock
when it ever makes it to production.
“Earth to Barry calling, earth to Barry,”
“Hurt your reputation? what a load of crap and you know it”
Nice touch trying to put some humor into this long argument. But I
feel my analysis is right and so far you have not convinced me
otherwise.
“if you post up anything that is not in agreeance the owners will try
every possible way to discredit the poster not only publicly but
privately whether correct or not? would make things a bit clearer and
I wouldn?t have posted in the first place”
Again you are trying to victimize yourself and prorating this site as
the root of all evil. You are too clever not to have figured we would
respond to your provocative posts.
“BUT your the one with the delete button if it was such an issue why
leave the posts on site?”
Do you suggest I delete your original post? Honestly? Do I seriously
have to explain the implications of deleting post of people making
claims to be able to open specific locks? This would really discredit
my name.
Last week I was even in court because someone wanted us to remove
voting computers software on our site. And we went to court to settle
it.
However, in this specific case I would be willing to delete the thread
if you give full disclosure about what you think is wrong with the RKS
samples you saw in Sneek.
“I used a bit of a sarcastic stance in my initial post which has been
totally missed but I wrote what I wrote and stand by it”
I do not read sarcasm in your first post. I read hate and intent to do
as much damage as possible. And provocation.
“right now you get the makers who know their product to be good
and those that only come to you that know you wont find fault”
Oh boy how wrong you are. In Sneek Marc brought some ‘unpickable
locks’ that Artur Meister picked in 10 minutes. And most of the
anti-bump solutions that manufacturers send us are not bump proof
after at leasts a second round of engineering at all.
“On the same note you don’t seem to care what damage your doing to my
reputation etc because of this thread so there’s two sides to it, were
all in business and some of us more so involved than others like to
think”
I am not damaging your reputation, you are doing that yourself.
And currently most readers do not even know who you are. Currently you
are just an anonymous voice on a forum, while Han and myself are not
hiding behind aliases.
You also accuse me of giving away your identity. I just called you
Paul after your two provocative postings. That is because people in
Sneek know you as Paul. I do not consider that a breach of trust.
And even tough I have close contact with lot of manufacturers and lock
related businesses I do not consider myself as being ‘in the lock
business’. I like to share knowledge gained by our hobby and passion,
and openly discuss topics that locksmiths and lock manufactures
sometimes rather would like to keep under the lid. But in this day and
age of the internet I think they are going to have a hard time keeping
many things secret.
Having said that, it is not my meaning in life to reveal others people
secrets. Just do not expect me to sit still when I see a problem that
other people hope ‘will go away by itself’.
“you think after this im going to be goaded into telling you anyway?”
It is clear from the beginning you never had the intention to tell.
So, I am not surprised to hear this at all.
“What I have chosen to do is to copyright my tool idea, I will then
await the release of this lock, I will then make and sell a tool for
opening this lock to locksmiths who want one should the same opening
still work, Therefore it is not in my interest to mention any further
the technique, tool or whatever behind my statements”
Wow. This one actually made me smile!
I must admit I admire your creativity in finding a way out if this
mess. Up until now your behavior could be considered pure
non-professionalism.
The argument of you being unethical and non-professional is
dissolved by this escape routine. And it is a statement I can not
argue, other then saying you cooked it up long after fueling a dirty
discussion here … very clever ….
“you have the edit/delete button not I so if its that worrying the
post could simply have been removed”
Sorry, but as I mentioned before the posts will stay, at least till we
have full disclosure of your concerns.
“and then message me privately about it to which to be honest I would
have gone into discussion with you on what I found with the lock and
what I made, instead you chose to try and damage myself by carrying it
on here”
Sure you would ….
I did send you a private e-mail after your first post. You publicly
replied on this forum with ‘Then I choose not to say so’.
“The lock shown at sneek was very week to the point that I think a
screwdriver with hex drive would easily break the lock and a lock
breaker would eat them up like they were made from paper”
You are right on this. What you saw was a mere proof on concept.
“then I suggest you simply delete the comments from my first post
down”
Sorry but that will not happen. This discussion is here to stay, at
least until we know how you think to be able to manipulate the lock.
“you can always do that when you remove the videos of myself I do not
want you to display on site anymore”
Do you think I would remove video from my own server I shot myself at our own event?
Seriously?
Or is this request just fuel for your next round(s) of provocations?
* I just read a statement from you I made a promise to remove the
video’s if you asked me to. As I privately e-mailed you I do not
recall having made that promise. But it could be because I had little
sleep in Sneek? Having said that, why did you not bring up that promise before?
“I suggest if you have issues with Barry or Han that you mail them
directly I will not fight battles on your behalf but the notes of
encouragement were nice and I thankyou but ask for them to stop as my
inbox cant cope lol,”
So far we have not received a single negative e-mail on this topic. But
maybe you can provoke some more and get more people to see you as a
poor victim.
And then about your latest posts:
“I will send it back of course but the lock will be drilled out so
no-one can work out my opening technique”
This one again made me smile. Very clever.
To be continued for sure ….
“I stick to my analysis of your first posts. It was meant to hurt,
provoke and do as much damage to the lock and this blog as possible.”
No it wasnt Barry, for what its worth i give my word that wasnt the intention by a very long shot, it was just a poorly worded, ill thought out statement but not premeditated nor posted with intent to cause trouble.
I have now spoken with John via email a number of times regarding this lock and this blog, there were appolagies on both sides and we have come to a very clear and ameanable understanding and will continue to mail each other regarding the development of his lock in a friendly and professional way.
Han suggests being a man or standing up and showing what sort of person i am, well how about this?
I appolagise that i offended you Barry and also you Han, i have as i say spoken to John a number of times but make statement here publically that John i am also sorry to you for any trouble, ill feeling or damage done here.
I did not and do not like long discussion in the way this has gone and each further post made gave me false hope that it would simply end it and i wouldnt have to keep coming back but unfortunaley all it did do is to give false impression, ill feeling and as you say add fuel to a fire, this again wasnt my intention i assure you, to try and keep the thread going with more and more posts isnt what i wanted at all hence the removal suggestions, i do not back down and that (i guess call it pig headedness), meant i couldnt back down here,
I wasnt suggesting for my post and only my post to be removed but rather the whole lot to be removed and then maybe an organised discussion restarted again that didnt have all the surplus BS that has gone with this one.
I hope that this shows what sort of person i am, i am backing down,
I shall continue to discuss the system with John privately and after a few mails it is clear that my short experiance previously was an out of charecter one and John is a very decent and approchable person.
I love the lock concept and wish those involved all the best with it.
Without wanting or meaning to fire anything up again i would like to say where things are right now incase you dont already know, ive asked John if i can buy a lock of my own, i do not retract my statement of opening them but will and have started to discuss this with John privately, ive made John certain promises and i will as always keep to my word on those.
John will also be disclosed any of my findings on the modified locks ive requested to buy.
I hope this can be the end of all this and things can move on, its a shame when things turn bad and neither party will back down so i hope ive done the decent thing and we can now put this to rest.
For the average reader the above comment probalby sounds reasonable and even humble.
To be continued as there is more to come ….
Ok, so as Barry has been threatening legal action because i assume he doesnt understand the actual context or wording of any of my private emails?!
Barry has requested me to state on here that the lock wasnt opened!!! Unfortunatley all the legal threats in the world will not turn me into a lier, as it was opened and ive explained in what context (which has been repeated below).
I thought standing up and making public appolagy would hopefully calm all this down but it obviously hasnt with my latest emails having been misunderstood and the fight starting up again as a one sided argument on Barrys side,
I state here in more detail my original claim, its as is and if some do or dont like it then thats no issue to me as its unimportant, the important thing is that John knows im sorry for the rudeness statement/s and that i will not indeed release details of any openings across the internet as previously threatened.
A statement ive made to Barry and John via email is as follows…..
“When i state that there are governing factors not mentioned in the initial post this means that where stated the lock was opened a number of times in a 5 minute time scale what actually happened was that the method was tried out, the theory shown to work then because of limited time the last few discs were manually set by the decoder and then rest of the lock opened as i thought it would, this was merely a time saving exorcise and will be no differant from opening the full lock in one go as a fully scrambled lock.”
Now what this means is that the lock although not fully scrambled was opened a number of times, the lock fully scrambled would make no differance on the method or result of how i did it but may infact mean that the lock may only be opened once in the 5 minute time scale mentioned instead of the multiple times while trying the method,
What has actually happened is that Barry has read this to mean i didnt open the lock which is wrong.
The more emails i get from people envolved with this (or rather not involved with it) the more i believe that this will be carried on until someone can twist one of my mails to the point of being able to win the argument and i am not willing for that to happen in that way as its dirty and underhanded.
The issue at hand should be between myself and John not barry and han and i fail to see why this has got them so involved,
As far as im concerned this is the state of play,
John is a great guy, he is freindly and approchable. The short experiance i had at sneek was out of charector and unintentional and i fully understand and believe that and along with accepting the appolagy for that from John i also do not hold it against him and have forgotten it now.
John and myself have had a few short mails with each other and i have made the offer to show him an opening with a full guide including pics of how i did it, i get the impression that we are on friendly terms,
I feel barry and han have taken things to heart too much and either read things wrongly or have twisted my words to make me look the bad guy, in private mails barry is nice and totally differant to how he has replied here, i apprechiate that han hasnt contacted me via email nor has he recently posted on here so i only summise he feels the same as barry,
I have appolagised on here and privately through email to barry and john, i have backed down on here and in email.
I have offered full disclosure to the maker of the lock along with barry and han.
Barry mailed me today to say that he is gogin to post up on here calling me a lier and assume shit stirrer, hes read mails incorrectly or misunderstood them or is just plain now trying to be vindictive and ruin my name, either way i do not know what his intention is as this seems to have got personal on his side a long time ago and it sounds like anything goes in the name calling stakes,
I have no interest in playing games nor seeing who has the biggest balls or bank account, its really just so petty.
I summerise yet again to try and make it clear as day for you barry,
1) I opened the lock,
2) I exagorated that it was opened fully a number of times in 5 minutes but it was opened a number of times in 5 minutes except the lock was only half scrambled,
3) The tests i did at sneek involved a part scrambled lock for no other reason than time, if the lock was fully scrambled the method will still work but it would mean that maybe one opening would be achieved within 5-10 mins,
4) If the electronics are on the lock as John described at sneek my method would be useless and the lock as good as impossable to open, my method is on the mechanics of the lock if used as a mechanical lock, this statement maybe should have been mentioned in the original post but wasnt but has subcequently been mentioned via email.
5) Ive tried to defuse, appolagise and taken a lot of crap to try and end this battle, it seems John is ok with me but barry and probably han for some reason want to kep this gogin.
6) Barry instead of taking things at face value thinks there some evil dastardly force at work here thats trying to damage him and this blog which is farther from the truth, the fact is i speak what i think and do it without thinking of the consequences, its not the end of the world like barry thinks unless he makes it so.
So whats the issue now then barry?
Ive said sorry,
Ive made clear what the state of play is as in how and when the lock was opened,
Ive made friends with the maker,
Ive posted bits on here youve asked me to,
Ive been nice and respectful in the emails,
Im sure i can carry on but would rather there just be an end to this, if i simply stop posting it would be an end on my side but would it stop you from bad mouthing me? would it stop you from trying to get whoever to sue me? (as i say via email bring it on if thats how you want to play),
You state that you will post up here lies to try and get my name in the mud but i dont understand why unless it is simply because youve misunderstood the mails or that youve now got personal issue with me and want to air them in public?
I think ive done more than enough not only to justify myself but also to repair any ill feeling caused, if this issue is wanted to be carried on then go ahead but i shall not be invloved any longer with these childish games.
I shall continue to talk with John about his locks and system if he so wishes and maybe things can start to move on instead of being stuck in this rut of name calling and misinterpretation.
I shall not post again on this blog so bid you all good day, i shall neither respond to nasty and a accusive emails from barry or han,
For the average reader the above comment probalby sounds like im trying to start it up again which im not, im ending it as far as im concerned.
To be continued as there is more to come i am sure but it will be without me.
One last comment i would like to say about the lock at Sneek,
The lock presented was a cutway of a prototype 6 disc cylinder. The discs did not have false gates, there was no scrambling mechanism and the discs could be observed. It was not completely representative of a production unit and therefore did not fully represent the finished product in terms of “pick-ability.
There was no assumption that the final incarnation of the lock would be suppceptable to any sort of attack and any statements made were indeed based on the lock seen as described above.
I think I have found a weak spot and have offered to help the inventor in addressing it.
Thanks for your final say.
I will only answer to what I think is the basis of this way too long
lasting argument:
>Ive made clear what the state of play is as in how and when the lock was opened,
You never ever disclosed how the lock was supposably opened, or
‘almost opened’. Not in public and not in private.
The only thing that could have ended this in a normal and professional
way is if you would have disclosed what you think is wrong with the lock.
We asked it in public many times. I even made the generous offer to
remove this whole discussion and completely forget about the whole
matter, as long as you told us your concerns in private. That was all
you had to do.
But you refused and only managed to come up excuses not to tell.
And you knew the ice was melting under your feet when Han challenged
you to open a lock he was going to send you. But again you tried
everything not to have to show you were right, dragging in more and
more arguments. I think by that time you must have figured this was
going to wrong way for you and you decided to try to end it by
‘apologize for insulting us’. Well, I never felt insulted, I felt
provoked. And I still feel messed around with.
Anyone else in your situation would have tried his best to prove he
could open the lock. Find just one witness in Sneek or open a lock
send by us. You could have created false forensic scratches or even
sandpaper the lock after opening it, removing all traces on how you
did it. But you did not.
The best example is you promised full disclosure after we send you a
lock. But before you received it there would be no information what so
ever on what you think is the problem.
I let it rest for now and will only continue to talk if you tell us
your concerns or if you prove yourself right opening the lock.
Until that happens I will not comment on this case anymore.
To me it is one of the darkest pages of this weblog.
Hi PW,
You claim that you can open the RKS lock.
You do not want to demonstrate it (hiding it behind forensic traces)
You want to be anonymous, Why? (behind this mask you can tell the world everything and shout and point at people)
You put a lot of words on this blog (I do not know if I can call it text).
What do you want? Upset people? Inform people with bull-shit? Undermine Toool or Barry or me? Is writing a way to get rid of your frustrations?
Start identifying yourself and make clear what your motives are to do
this? Or are your motives standing above.
Fact is that you bring damage to the RKS lock by telling lies about this lock, because this lock can simply not be manipulated.
If the RKS lock can be manipulated, the lock world should know who this marvellous lockpicker is. How he did it is not important, but that he did, is important.
Please stop with making the world around you black, and dare to say that you were mistaken about the manipulation of the RKS-lock, don’t run away.
This way you get respect from people. Or do you want to stay in the melting pot of words in your head. You can of course, but do not ventilate these words then on blogs and forums.
Han Fey
Oi,
Not to stir anything else up here, but I wanted to go on record as having heard nothing of anyone opening the RKS lock while at the Dutch Open. I had the absolute pleasure and privilege of spending time with John and his lock both at the Toool meeting preceding the conference and at the conference itself, not to mention further discussion of possible attacks over drinks back in Amsterdam after the conference. Nothing came up during his talk (when everyone, myself included, was trying to throw out possibilities as John and Han dutifully discussed the lock) Now, I haven’t spoken with John, specifically, since, but I’ve kept in regular contact with any number of other folks who either have a stake in this lock, or had a chance to attack it, and though there are some very valid issues (as address in Han’s excellent paper and all of which I believe are being addressed to some degree by John and his team) there was no point in the conference where word of it being opened reached my ears.
It’s a small space, and as I said, I had the pleasure and privilege of attending every minute of the event and most there, I’m sure, remember just how social I was, I’d be shocked if I hadn’t heard a peep of it.
I’m fairly new to this passtime, but it means a lot to me and I keep well informed. I should hope that any flaw in the RKS would be properly discussed with John, as he is one of the few modern lockmakers out there who actually embraces what this community has to offer.
I hope this has all been laid to rest, but I couldn’t help but offer another perspective on things.
– Schuyler