LAS VEGAS — It wouldn’t be DefCon without a noted lock hacking team demonstrating the gross insecurity of some of the latest security locks, such as a biometric lock that could be easily cracked with a paper clip.

This year the three-member team of lock hackers, Marc Weber Tobias, Toby Bluzmanis and Matt Fiddler who have been cracking locks at DefCon for several years, also defeated an electro-mechanical lock, two deadbolts, and an electronic safe. The researchers gave Wired.com a sneak peek at their cracks and provided videos, which you can see below.

The lock that would seem to have thwarted them the most was actually one of the easiest to crack. The Biolock Model 333 is a sleek $200 lock that combines a mechanical cylinder and fingerprint reader.

“It’s a very neatly designed container,” says Tobias. “But the problem with this lock design is so elementary, frankly it defies belief. ”

The lock can be programmed with one or more “master” fingerprints, which can be used to authorize other users. To open the lock, a user touches the fingerprint pad, and a blue LED light illuminates to indicate the person is authorized, allowing the door handle to turn. The lock can also be unlocked with a remote-control.

If the fingerprint reader fails, a mechanical key can be used instead. The key entry is concealed beneath a flip door on the lever handle. And therein lies the security problem, Tobias says.

The mechanical lock, which uses a bypass cylinder, can be easily thwarted with a paperclip inserted in the keyway to depress a pin that engages the latch. In two seconds, the researchers were able to open the lock.

“This is an absolute perfect example of insecurity engineering,” Tobias says.

Biolock did not respond to a request for comment.

The researchers also tackled a smartkey deadbolt from Kwikset, which makes some of the most widely used locks in the U.S. The smartkey technology allows someone to easily program the lock with a reset tool to accept specific keys, making it popular with apartment building owners who can re-program the lock when a tenant moves out.

The lock’s packaging touts it as certified at grade-one security level — the highest for residential locks. The researchers, however, were able to crack the lock with only a key blank cut to a specific depth and a screw driver.

They put the blank into the lock, inserted a screw driver to push the blank into the chamber, then used a small vice grip to turn the screw driver and open the lock.

They would need to remove the blank using a wire to make the lock operational for other keys. Major Manufacturers also makes a $90 locksmith tool that consists of a T-rod with a blank attached to the end to replace the screwdriver and blank.

“The entire security of this system rests on tiny little sliders that are being warped in this process,” says Tobias, noting that the crack doesn’t take any expertise to conduct. Ironically, Kwikset’s packaging for the lock includes a statement that says, “All you need is a screw driver.” The slogan refers to installing the lock, but “either way,” says Tobias, “it is essentially a very true statement.”

Kwikset spokesman Brent Flaharty said in an e-mail statement that the company couldn’t respond to the researcher’s claims without seeing a video of the hack. He added that Kwikset’s locks have “passed the most stringent lock-picking standard.”

But Tobias says that the standards are part of the problem, since they don’t test for many real-world lock-cracking techniques.

“You read the packaging and yes they are certified as grade-one. But they ought to be putting on the package that there are tools and techniques that can open these locks in 30 seconds or less,” he says. “Obviously they won’t do that, because no one will buy their locks.”

Next, the researchers cracked the AMSEC electronic safe Model es1014. The safe is not high security, but is marketed for home and small businesses and sells for about $90.

It has a digital keypad that can be programmed with up to eight numbers. Inside the safe, is a reset button on the back of the door to change the combination. Little thought apparently went into the position of the button, however, because the researchers found they could reach it with a flat metal piece used for hanging file folders. Bluzmanis slipped the metal into the narrow space between the closed door and frame, flipped it around and pressed the reset button, allowing him to reprogram the combination to anything he wanted and open the door.

AMSEC did not respond to a request for comment.

The most impressive lock they examined, the iLoq C10S, is an electro-mechanical lock that combines electronic key authentication and audit trail with a mechanical lock. The researchers were able to disable the electronic portion, allowing unauthorized users to gain entry without being tracked. The attack requires modification of an authenticated key supplied either from an insider or through borrowing or theft.

The iLoq has a unique award-winning design that differs from other electro-mechanical locks: it has no battery, either in the lock or in the key. Instead, the processor for authenticating keys is powered by a mechanical motor inside the lock. Unfortunately, the clever design works against the lock’s security, Tobias says.

The lock operates in four stages. As a key is inserted, the motor wakes the processor to authenticate the key. Then the motor turns a gear to start the mechanical system. As the key travels through the keyway, it lifts a nylon pin that lifts a second metal pin, allowing the lock chamber to turn. The lock resets when the key is removed.

The hack involves filing off a tiny hook at the tip of an authenticated key, which would take less than a minute to do, Tobias says.



When the key is inserted, it’s authenticated by the processor, and the pins lift to open the door. But absent the hook on the end of the key, it’s unable to catch a second hook inside the lock to reset the mechanical portion that generates energy for the processor. With the processor dead, any simulated key, non-authenticated key or even a screw driver can be inserted to lift the nylon pin that lifts the metal pin and opens the lock. The modified key would be in the audit trail, so investigators would be able to identify who owned that key, but not necessarily who modified it.

A second attack involves using a little dremel tool that costs about $60. In this attack, the researchers insert the tool to shave off the hook inside the lock. The result is the same as the previous hack, with one caveat. The first key inserted after the hook is shaved must be an authenticated key; if an unauthenticated key, the lock will be disabled for any authenticated key thereafter.

An iLock spokesman said the hacks were unrealistic.

“Cutting off a part of an iLOQ key with the purpose of enabling the next key inserted to open the lock successfully, even [while] having no access rights, is a very complicated and stupid way to give access to a criminal companion,” said spokesman Michael Szücs in an e-mail. “Much easier it would be to leave a window open.”

The last lock they tackled was the KABA InSync deadbolt, a battery-operated electronic lock combined with an RFID key. To crack this one, the researchers simply inserted a small wire into the communication port at the bottom of the lock, and pushed a locking bar inside, allowing them to open the door.

KABA did not respond to requests for comment.

Photos: Dave Bullock

See also: