@odr_k4tana
A mechanical lock is safer because of the Swiss Cheese failure model, not because of security by obscurity. A mechanical lock cannot fail if the vendor goes out of business. You require physical access to tamper with such a lock...

But if you claim that digital locks are just as good, go for them.

We'll just publish the next fail fast events, like this one
https://beyondmachines.net/event_details/chirp-smart-locks-vulnerable-to-unauthorized-access-due-to-hardcoded-secrets-t-3-a-p-t

@beyondmachines1 Again: my crowbar won't care what kinda lock you have.
Swiss cheese models are all fun and games, but if your underlying threat model is wrong, it's useless.

Effectively, digital locks often offer more upsides than downsides, even in terms of security (not to mention usability, which btw is a prerequisite for security to be effective).

Btw: Publishing lock fails is good. They need to get fixed. Keep doing that. But analogue locks are plagued with problems, too (cf. lockpicking lawyer).

Analogue isn't safer/more secure. It's a different threat model.

@odr_k4tana @beyondmachines1 The threat model for hacking a smart lock involves relatively little effort to get into hundreds or thousands of houses where you know the location with little fuss or noise, and you will look to eyewitnesses like you might belong there.

For a physical lock and your crowbar? You have to use the crowbar for every house you want to break into and anyone who sees you will know what you’re doing.

1/2

@odr_k4tana @beyondmachines1 Also if a digital lock vendor goes out of business then *you* may be locked out of *your own* house because the software/firmware is dead. Not so with a physical lock.

2/2