A $2000+ lock and its insecurity

[lockinabox]

http://www.flickr.com/photos/45227209@N04/4164855090/

A Schlage Locknetics lock with a Medeco Logic override cylinder.
Combined Retail Price: Over $2000.
Security: Very Low.

Everyone already knows about the problems with the Medeco Logic system so I won't go into that. The Locknetics lock would be considered a good lock because it's very reliable. Unfortunately it has one non-destructive bypass problem and at least one semi-destructive bypass problem. To it's credit, I have tested it extensively using typical electronic lock bypass methods(i.e. magnetic, voltage) and it is secure against those. This was done on older model locks as well as new.

The third problem with this locking system is the subject of my primary rant: Cylindrical Latch "Locks." For some doors, this is the primary lock. The false sense of security that most users of these locks feel is dangerous. Most of the times the strike is not the right size or the door has to be perfectly aligned to prevent the blocking pin(i dont know the correct name, anti-pick pin?) from also entering the strike. If the door is just a little bit off, which can even be caused by a change in weather, the door will not be properly secured. Not to mention the ease of bypass and prying and leverage attacks to the latch.

A mortise lock or deadbolt should be mandatory on any door that is relatively heavy, used frequently, and needs any kind of security. The mortise latch is much larger and stronger and the blocking pin is above or below the latch rather than behind it like it in the cylindrical latch, so the door doesn't have to be at the perfect depth and alignment in the frame to be secure. I know that mortising a door is difficult and can reduce the integrity and strength of that part of the door, but this is minimal cost compared to the additional security that is gained.

I managed doors which protect extremely sensitive material that only had a cylindrical lock and I've seen houses only have cylindrical locks on their exterior doors. I've also had a friend lock their bedroom door with a knob lock and have their house-sitter just pry it open and steal 5 figures in cash (after discovering the code of their Sentry "safe"). Just about every home theft that's happened to anyone I know involved a cylindrical latch. I've also spent a lot of time modifying strikes and doors so they would consistently lock properly, only to have problems a few months later. Maybe if people stopped viewing cylindrical latches as real locks and started only using them as passage knobs, this stuff would not happen.

It just seems like a mortise lock as the minimum primary locking system is an absolute no-brainer. Then again, maybe it's just me.

[mitch.capper]

I completely agree, deadlatches can be a huge source of insecurity as they can be tricky to ensure consistent alignment. The problem is people like the ability for remote releases and doors that can automatically shut behind you. Aside from the obvious issues you mentioned that can accidentally happen it is also fairly easy for an insider to sabotage a deadlatch. I have seen a few electronic locks that do somewhat counter this by having a sensor in the latch to be able to determine its state (for auditing and unauthorized access). Thanks for the photo and info;)

[mh]

The Locknetics lock would be considered a good lock because it's very reliable. Unfortunately it has one non-destructive bypass problem and at least one semi-destructive bypass problem.

Just to understand you correctly - you have not included further details ahout these problems in you post, right?

Thanks
mh

[Rickthepick]

haha yes, looks very pretty but fitted incorrectly its a waste of time.

I work in a building with lots of digilocks and so-on that use similar latches, upon closer inspection they all have a dirty great hole for the latch and deadpin to fall into in the frame

[globallockytoo]

It just seems like a mortise lock as the minimum primary locking system is an absolute no-brainer. Then again, maybe it's just me.

I partially disagree. Perhaps in arcaic USA, where dwellings are built from ideas of the distant past (especially the building code). I remember working in the UK and Australia where the surface mounted RIM locks are quite prevalent. The Lockwood 001 and the 355 and the Chubb 4L67 and the Abloy Superstopper are quite common.

All superb quality surface mounted deadlocks that offer fundamental security that most mortise locks cannot ever hope to match. (And good looking to boot)

The USA market is limited by the shallow thinking and corrupt officials who think about padding their wallets rather than proactively considering the value of proper security devices.

[lockinabox]

Just to understand you correctly - you have not included further details ahout these problems in you post, right?

Yes. I don't have access to the advanced forums and I can't post the details in this forum. I would also not post them without having formally contacted the company first, which I have not done yet.

It just seems like a mortise lock as the minimum primary locking system is an absolute no-brainer. Then again, maybe it's just me.

I partially disagree.

I am not sure where the disagreement is. The locks you mention are very good locks but they are not the subject of my post. I talked about doors that have a deadlatching lock as the only lock (like my lock in the picture). Here in the U.S., the Americans with Disabilities Act mandates that in most cases a lever handle must be used (I know this makes the lock easier to bypass but there are ways to prevent this). The two choices are a cylindrical deadlatch and a mortise deadlatch, unless there is a commercial grade deadlatching rim lock with a large lever handle that can take 100+ openings a day. Of those two choices I said that at a minimum the mortise deadlatch lock should be used.

I think that a properly installed mortise lock with a 12-14 guage steel wrap around door, secured by 1-way screws or carriage bolts, is secure enough to be used as a "lock." Ideally there should also be a secondary deadbolt lock or a rim deadlatch lock on the door as well. Many companies and institutions in the U.S. buy some type of really expensive cylindrical electronic lock and think they've secured the door. If they would instead buy a standard or electronic mortise lock, the door would be much more secure and function a lot better.

I completely agree about the U.S. building codes and security standards, they are very inadequate.

I also forgot to rant in my first post about the latch getting stuck in cylindrical deadlatch locks from having any torque or pressure on the latch itself. This can happen if the lock is not perfectly installed at the correct height or distance relative to the latch, or from the latch hole being drilled at an angle instead of being level. Even if it's correctly installed, the lock can still move downwards over time in the hole and put pressure on the latch so it's more likely to stick. A mortise lock does not have this problem and if there's torque or pressure on the spindle it will not cause the latch to stick. If a mortise lock is incorrectly aligned, you will most likely not even be able to install the lock without fixing the alignment first. And once the lock is properly installed, it will remain in place. The mortise latch box (or what ever it's called) is just a much much more robust mechanism than some small flimsy little latch that is sensitive to any change in the lock or door position or alignment.

[globallockytoo]

The Lockwood 001L is exactly what you are talking about.

It is a surface mounted RIM lock that is deadlatching, with an internal lever handle.

When you lock the internal handle, from inside before departing, you slam the door shut and it is locked (deadlocked - every time).

When you enter from outside, the internal mechanism is automatically unlocked, removing any need to physically unlock the internal handle.

The lock is held to the door by 6 screws. The strike is held to the jamb by 6 screws too. At least a few of them are 3" long.

The locks can be keyed with almost any high security cylinder available.

The 001 has been the flagship product in Australia for well over 30 years. There are other companies that make copies too.

$ for $ and lb for lb, there are few locks that are comparable on the open market.

[lockinabox]

The Lockwood 001L is exactly what you are talking about.

That sounds like a great lock, but In the U.S., pretty much all doors and frames are prepared for either mortise or cylindrical locks.

[GutterClown]

The major misconception about the pricing of a commercial grade knob\lever set (what you refer to as a cylindrical latch lock) is that Price = Security.
In fact, generally Price = Quality. Quality ≠ Security.
In most cases, you will get more hard and\or long-term usage out of a $190 Lockwood 530, than you will from a $15 hardware store special.

In the same frame of reference, I could sell you two padlocks, one 45mm padlock for $12.50, and one 45mm padlock for $76.50. Same capabilities, same applications, same level of brute-force resistance.
Price ≠ Security.

[lockinabox]

(what you refer to as a cylindrical latch lock)

I refer to it as such because a commercial grade knob/lever set could be either mortise or cylindrical and my post is mostly about the benefits of one versus the other so specific language about the function and form of the lock is required.

In fact, generally Price = Quality. Quality ≠ Security.(what you refer to as a cylindrical latch lock)

Generally speaking I agree, but In the case of a cylindrical deadlatch, price ≠ quality because of the deficiencies of the cylindrical deadlatch. I mean sure you can have a really good one, but that's like having the best Sentry "Safe".

In other news, it appears that I need to change the name of the thread to "Lockwood is the world's greatest lock company and all 1 billion+ doors in the United States should be modified to use their locks."

[Tyler J. Thomas]

The third problem with this locking system is the subject of my primary rant: Cylindrical Latch "Locks." For some doors, this is the primary lock. The false sense of security that most users of these locks feel is dangerous. Most of the times the strike is not the right size or the door has to be perfectly aligned to prevent the blocking pin(i dont know the correct name, anti-pick pin?) from also entering the strike. If the door is just a little bit off, which can even be caused by a change in weather, the door will not be properly secured. Not to mention the ease of bypass and prying and leverage attacks to the latch.

Ah, this is where your "good citizen" and "inexperience" clash.

Consider, if you would, an exit door. In a commercial environment and on an exit door deadbolts are not allowed on the door. Latch locks, assuming they are fire rated (the one in the picture is), are allowed (granted they allow for one motion egress). This is how you get security (albeit lacking) to conform with codes. So, yes, it is definitely less security than a deadbolt but would you want to leave other's security in the event of a fire up to the few people that have a key for that deadbolt on the exit door as well? I wouldn't.

[mhole]

A dead lock can be fitted to allow keyless egress, and on a solid door with no adjacent windows or letter box it is usually just as secure.

The UK market has numerous good quality rim-mount latch locks which deadlock, an obvious example being the Ingersoll SC71, which has been in constant production for over 30 years and is still a fantastic lock.

In my few, all to brief, trips to the US, I've been genuinely amazed by what it considered to be a decent lock. The typical yale cylinder opperating a spring latch is piss poor, and the ludicrously insubstantial mortice deadbolt is hardly better. I get called to broken spring latches on internal doors once or twice a month on average, so I'm amazed people trust their security to them on an external, relatively high traffic door.

[lockinabox]

Ah, this is where your "good citizen" and "inexperience" clash. Consider, if you would, an exit door. In a commercial environment and on an exit door deadbolts are not allowed on the door.

Ah, this is where your lack of "reading" and lack of "understanding" intersect.

Consider, if you would, that I never said you should put a deadbolt on every door:

The two choices are a cylindrical deadlatch and a mortise deadlatch, unless there is a commercial grade deadlatching rim lock with a large lever handle that can take 100+ openings a day. Of those two choices I said that at a minimum the mortise deadlatch lock should be used.

This is all I ever said about deadbolts:

I think that a properly installed mortise lock with a 12-14 guage steel wrap around door, secured by 1-way screws or carriage bolts, is secure enough to be used as a "lock." Ideally there should also be a secondary deadbolt lock or a rim deadlatch lock on the door as well.

How you interpreted the above quote to mean that I want exit doors to have deadbolts is beyond me.

My posts are primarily about the two most common DEADLATCH locks in the US, and how much I dislike the cylindrical deadlatch for a number of reasons. If you want to dispute the arguments I actually make, then please do. But you are disputing something that I never claimed.

Also, there is no "good citizen" writing this post. I am "citizen" who is "ranting."

I should not have to quote my previous posts in the same thread. People not actually reading posts before they respond is one of the reasons I don't post very much. I welcome discussion and disagreement, but please actually read and understand what it is that you are disagreeing with.

[Tyler J. Thomas]

[quote="lockinabox]The two choices are a cylindrical deadlatch and a mortise deadlatch, unless there is a commercial grade deadlatching rim lock with a large lever handle that can take 100+ openings a day. Of those two choices I said that at a minimum the mortise deadlatch lock should be used.[/quote]

Again, this goes back to code adherence. You cannot drill a hole any larger than 1" diameter in any fire rated door. You cannot simply prep a fire door to accommodate a mortise deadlatch. It has to be prepped at the factory. Considering that can cost you thousands of dollars for the door alone (never mind the labor and any additional parts), a cylindrical dead latch (assuming the door in question carries the very common and very standard 161 prep) seems quite economical and feasible.

My posts are primarily about the two most common DEADLATCH locks in the US, and how much I dislike the cylindrical deadlatch for a number of reasons. If you want to dispute the arguments I actually make, then please do. But you are disputing something that I never claimed.

You're talking negatively about a lock that has a very, very useful purpose (if you want examples, I'll give you tons). You're grading the lock as if all doors are capable of being converted easily to accommodate a mortise prep and that conversion is practical. Most of the time it's not and you need a solution for the situation at hand. That's why locks are made: a unique situation calls for a product not yet on the market.

Starting from scratch, mortise over cylindrical? Sure, I'll give you that argument, but that type of scenario is almost never the case.

[lockinabox]

You cannot simply prep a fire door to accommodate a mortise deadlatch. It has to be prepped at the factory. Considering that can cost you thousands of dollars for the door alone (never mind the labor and any additional parts), a cylindrical dead latch (assuming the door in question carries the very common and very standard 161 prep) seems quite economical and feasible.

Thanks for your post! I forgot about fire doors. That's exactly the kind of specific response I was hoping for.
I need to restate my earlier words as "When possible, a mortise lock as the minimum primary locking system is an absolute no-brainer."

Starting from scratch, mortise over cylindrical? Sure, I'll give you that argument, but that type of scenario is almost never the case.

Unfortunately a lot of people don't think this way. In fact the people I work for, before my time, actually converted hundreds of mortised doors to cylindrical (this main source of my hatred). This was done when money or other considerations were not an issue. I just wish more people thought of a cylindrical deadlatch as the least attractive locking option when you have other options.