by Chucklz » 10 Jan 2004 22:10
I have something that I'd like to throw out here, I have never tried it, and I can see several theoretical limitaions in it, but it probably could yield a key after a few minutes. I suggest making a modified set of depth keys. In this set, there would be no spacings... just depth. So there would be no "peaks" just a flat blank at all of the standard depth levels. You pick the lock, and by insertion, its fairly easy to determine the depth of the first pin. Lets say, for the sake of this that you have a 5 pin lock keyed 64755. You determine that the first pin is 6. You cant insert the 6 key all the way into the lock, so you know that theres a pin thats at a greater depth. Feeling with your pick, you can determine that its the third pin. So at this point you KNOW that the key must be 6x(7,8,9)xx. Probing the second pin with your pick, you can discover that its something smaller than the 6 that is the first pin. So you can get 6(0,1,2,3,4,5)(7,8,9)xx. Now if you go to the 7 key, you find that you can insert it completely into the lock. This confirms that the 3rd pin is indeed 7. and that the 4th or 5th pins cannot be 8 or 9. Now you have the following possibilites 6(0,1,2,3,4,5) 7 (0,1,2,3,4,5,6) (0,1,2,3,4,5,6). On this particular lock, you can do nothing else from the depth keys of value. But, you have solved definitavely for 2 of the 5 pins, and have eliminated several possibilites from the remaining pins. At this point, you could cut the key 60700 Assuming you dont violate MACS. Any MACS violations could help you narrow things down a bit further. Now, Impression the remaining 3 pins. You may be able to dermine with careful pick feeling that the second pin is not 0, 1, 2, 3, and that the last two pins are also not 0,1,2,3 and the same height (in this case). Its not perfect, but it could be usefull.
