product called pickbuster

[UAPLTD]

Chris B.

Thank you for the post.

I take on board your comments. As for UAP we have been involved in the marketing of PB for 2 months. Almore have been developing the product for 18 months.

There is a large amount of test data that has been independently conducted proving PB's effectiveness against the average burglar - not against expert locksmiths or expert lock-pickers who pose no real threat to the normal householder.

As for scaremongering this is the main concern for everyone. But simply put Bump Key in to any search engine and you will find 2 million or so threads to this subject, and many videos of how to bump and offers to sell the equipment.

Just yesterday we were approached by a large council advising that bumping had occured in their area and their tenants were worried about this spreading.

The threat and occurences of bumping is in the market and growing, and to date the only low cost retro option to help people is PB. If there is another low cost, simple retro option that will reduce the threat of bumping then please state what it is becuase I do not know of one.

As for testing, then this has been well covered and new independent tests are currently being conducted as previously disclosed.

[UAPLTD]

Chris B

Thank you for your posting.

It is alsmost universally accepted that PB is a good means to stop the average burglar againing quick access in to a property by bumping. This has been tested time and time again.

However, bumping by an expert is a different kettle of fish and goes beyond the scope of PB or any other lock or lock device. Isn't it after all the objective of this site to by-pass locking systems.

Independent tests have been undertaken, and a whole new series of tests are being done as we speak as per my previous replies.

As regards to scaremongering this is a real issue and it is not helped by the 2 million or so threads, articles and videos as seen in any google, yahoo etc search on key terms such as bump key.

Only yesterday we were approached by a very large housing association with a real problem with burglaries by bumping in their properties.

The problem exists, it is real and it is growing. It is growing due to the actions of disreputable persons on the internet publishing 'how to bump' videos in an attempt to sell bump keys and the like.

PB is the only product that I am aware of that gives some protection to the property owner in a retro-fit application at a modest cost against the majority of burglars.

[Schuyler]

Usually I would just remove one of the two double posts to the trash, but they're both unique and well worded, so I think I'll leave it stand.

[UAPLTD]

Sorry for the double post.

I replied earler this morning but it didn't appear on the site by this afternoon, I Posted again......and then low and behold both posts appear at together......like buses in Bury.

[globallockytoo]

Whilst I commend you Chris B for having the courage to come into the lions den to state your case, I used to also believe similarly.

Sweeping the matters under the rug, into secure forums and into the hands of security professionals only, tends to bury the problems out of sight of the true recipients of any kind of offered solution.

The core general public have every right as you or any other member of the security industry to have confidence in security professionals that they are working on measures to protect them.

Blinldy saying that the public should be hidden from these discussions is one of the reasons that bumping first got into the public eyes....your attitudes stink...pal!

I have been in the trade over 25 years and used to believe similarly to you. By encouraging public forum discussion and the involvement of hobbyists in discussion of possible alternatives and remedies encourages the community to trust in their locksmith and security professionals.

Also it helps to reinforce public opinion about security professionals who actually care about the customer....enough to include them in what they (the customers) want.....not what you want.

Sweeping the matter into closed discussion would be worse....seems like a very typical old school locksmith reaction, in my opinion.

[horsefeathers]

globallockytoo - gotta say that i agree with you on this. Better that ALL concerned parties have input on this matter so that any problems are found and solutions discovered, rather than a few locksmiths discussing it all privately like some Masonic lodge.

CB - no offence but you do seem to like to lord it a little over people on here. I think the arguments posted by hobbyists and locksmiths alike in this thread, together with the manufacturers/marketers responses are leading to a well informed debate. I for one will come out of this more knowledgeable about the product and it's advantages and drawbacks, and can then offer intelligent answers to customers enquiring about this product. I have no desire to join (or rejoin) a secretive order of locksmiths all huddled together muttering misgivings about this and that!

I say let this thread continue....it is about a product's claim to defeat bumping and the truth therein. It is not about how to bump locks (lord knows there is enough out there already on this).

regards

[lockey1963]

I see and understand both arguments on the closed forum issues, however from this discussion some good has come which may not have happened otherwise.
Almore and UAP have agreed to and commissioned thorough testing of their product from impartial university as well as expert groups with no financial interests in the product and with nothing to gain one way or the other with the results.

i expect the product will thrive or die on the basis of these results, which is a good thing for the consumer and security professional both.

once properly tested no one can dispute the results if favourable or if not.

i admire the UAP chaps honesty and willingness to listen and to act, and the manufacturers almore are to be commended for acting also, dependent upon the results im sure we will all know conclusively one way or the other if PB is a good product or not, i look forward to reading these results with interest.

[jimb]

Some of the results were and still remain deliberately withheld because I considered this information to be ‘not in the public interest’.

This line really gets me. Not in the public interest? Don't you think that if there are weaknesses in this product that ANYONE using it should know and be aware of it before they rely on it?

Me thinks you should huddle in a corner with the other locksmiths that are holding back and let some on this group see what they can do. I think they will think of test that you never dreamed of, and you know what might happen from the results? It's possible that the product will be improved because of the results instead of being swept under the carpet because of any weaknesses.

Believe me all the YouTube guys will be working on it wanting to be the first to post a way to beat this stuff.

[UAPLTD]

I apologise if this is duplicated, but the systems does not seem to like my posts over 6 or so lines

I believe strongly in this debate being in the public domain. Not just about PB but about the whole issue of bumping and lock security.

In the past 20 years householders by the millions have bought various types of multi-point locks etc believing that these will secure their properties. It is clear that they won't.

What makes Bumping different to anything else is the inability of the victim to claim on their insurance. The victim then gets hit twice and has the feeling of being vulnerable in their own home.

I came to this forum exactly 1 week ago. In that time I have been genuinely impressed with the forum's comments both public and private. UAP and Almore have as a direct response undertaken a lot of changes to both our independent test reports and our marketing of PB. At this very moment our designers are re-drafting our sales literature to make it clear that PB offers the best known retro solution to the problem of Bumping from all but the most expert or determined burglar. We have also developed deterrent stickers that will warn off most of the burglars from attempting to attack the property.

These changes are a huge leap forward, and it would not have happened without this forums discussion.

My view of PB has not changed in that it offers the best retro protection to most householders but I accept that experts like yourselves can by-pass it as you have the necessary level of skill.....not just knowledge. The skill is a very important ingredient.

I also think it must be universally accepted that a householder would be given more protection if they install PB than if they do nothing. PB will stop most burglars. Those that it doesn't stop will need to carry a growing list of materials which may be hard to explain to a police officer - brake cleaner, bump key etc.

Given that PB offers the best current retro protection I find it incredible that there are whispers in the secrecy and comfort of private forums condemning the product without offering any suitable or viable alternative. How does this give the consumer any comfort whatsoever.

I will leave this post with the following true example. Just over 2 months ago (just before we got involved with PB) I showed my mother (now 84) the video of bumping taken from Dutch TV News. I wanted to see her reaction as a vulnerable elderly person. The next morning she rang me and told me that she had slept that evening with chairs against the locked doors and another against her bedroom door. She asked me if there was something I could do to stop this as she did not want to leave the house in case someone got in. I installed PB in to her locks and she has been happy ever since. There are few people in this world that mean more to me than my Mother. So am I confident about PB in her locks? The answer is yes, yes and yes again. I know that PB will keep out almost all the threats to her home from bumping, and it is a far far better solution than the only other option, that of simply doing nothing.

[79commando]

I think the main point CB was getting at was not the ability of PB to resist bumping it was letting non trading locksmiths know that PB can actually be used to assist in bypassing hard to pick locks. After all loads of users get flamed for trying to discuss bypassing in the public forum but this one is OK.

As for relieving your mothers fears after you had put the shi## up her by showing her the bump video I could show her ample photos of kicked in doors which PB will not solve yet it is still the preferred method of entry into premises.

Full marks for discussing it all here as most manufacturers don't have the similar balls. You are aware you could either give your product excellent exposure or allow it to be ridiculed and to crash and burn.

For my pennies worth I've seen PB preventing an easily bumped lock from being bumped, opened with an EPG and made more difficult to hand pick. I've also witnessed the same lock being overcome with the addition of a well known brake cleaner easily and a hard to hand pick lock being treated and then picked easily due to one of the properties of PB which should not be published in the open forum.

[79commando]

I think the main point CB was getting at was not the ability of PB to resist bumping it was letting non trading locksmiths know that PB can actually be used to assist in bypassing hard to pick locks. After all loads of users get flamed for trying to discuss bypassing in the public forum but this one is OK.

As for relieving your mothers fears after you had put the shi## up her by showing her the bump video I could show her ample photos of kicked in doors which PB will not solve yet it is still the preferred method of entry into premises.

Full marks for discussing it all here as most manufacturers don't have the similar balls. You are aware you could either give your product excellent exposure or allow it to be ridiculed and to crash and burn.

For my pennies worth I've seen PB preventing an easily bumped lock from being bumped, opened with an EPG and made more difficult to hand pick. I've also witnessed the same lock being overcome with the addition of a well known brake cleaner easily and a hard to hand pick lock being treated and then picked easily due to one of the properties of PB which should not be published in the open forum.

[79commando]

Sorry for the double post I think the server is playing up

[UAPLTD]

79Commando. I totally agree with your observation about the kicked in doors. But in those cases there is not only a lot of noise, but also a lot of evidence as to the means of entry.

PB is aimed at stopping access to the property by the average burglar who does not have the skills associated with most people in this forum. There is also the added issue of time, and we work to the standard set down by EN1303/Secure by Design of 5 minutes.

As also pointed out this forum has led us to produce Warning Stickers which act as an extra deterrent. Given similar homes a burglar will be more inclined to choose an easier target.

[nhughz]

I disagree that PB will stop the average burglar; the average burglar forces entry. Those bumping locks are on the whole a new breed of burglar who use the internet and frequent open forums and email groups such as this one. I agree with Chris B, this is a topic for the advanced section and other closed forums because the very people who bump locks to gain illegal entry to property, will be lurking here to find the solutions to the PB problem. Sure they will probably find the solution themselves eventually but why help them along the way.

PB is the only product that I am aware of that gives some protection to the property owner in a retro-fit application at a modest cost against the majority of burglars.

If a wooden door it would always be advised to fit a 5 lever BS mortice lock and use it.

[zeke79]

Everyone seems to be missing the point. UAPLTD is stating the the product stops (or is supposed to) non destructive entry by bumping which leaves no evidence behind that is visible to the naked eye when done properly.

THe point is, your insurance company is going to pay if you were robbed and your door is kicked as there is evidence of forced entry. Your insurance company is NOT going to pay if the lock was bumped and you were robbed as there is no sign of FORCED entry.

I believe this is the point that is trying to be expressed.