View Single Post
Old 10-30-15 | 01:59 PM
  #18  
JohnJ80
Senior Member
10 Anniversary
 
Joined: Feb 2011
Posts: 4,681
Likes: 253
From: Minnesota

Bikes: N+1=5

Originally Posted by erig007
The biggest problem of these locks is that they are adding weaknesses above those already there by the fact there is no need of physical contact to actually defeat them. A thief with a hacking device in his/her pocket may stay unnoticed until the lock is defeated. Which also means that an embedded alarm could be useless if the alarm is using the same system.
This compared to conventional locks where as soon as a thief starts working on a lock there is no doubt about his/her intentions.
In the article about car theft, the electronic strategy was prefer to previous techniques because it was stealthier and quicker.
En France, 300 voitures sont volées chaque jour

Also key locks have become good enough (since the bic pen period) that picking locks is painful according to some reviews, some locks are virtually unpickable.
The best bike locks and chains - BikeRadar

Electronic locks on the contrary....
This Hacker's Tiny Device Unlocks Cars And Opens Garages | WIRED
Electronic High-Security Locks Easily Defeated at DefCon | WIRED

One of the pro of these electronic locks i see regarding theft protection is about the jamming-the-locking-mechanism-then-coming-back-later-to-finish-the-job strategy.

All you need to do is look at the youtube videos of people defeating any lock you can think of - all with relative ease and all within a minute or so. None of these locks are going to protect your bike from a determined and skilled thief. Some are better than others, but in the end, it's going to be if your bike is more inconvenient to steal than the one next to it. A good protection is to lock your bike next to somebody who doesn't know how to do it correctly and use a good lock.

Net of all of that is that I don't think it really matters and these locks will supply equal or better security to the standard keyed U lock.

J.
JohnJ80 is offline  
Reply