Friday, 14 October 2011
Sunday, 16 December 2007
Sunday, 9 December 2007
Wednesday, 8 August 2007
Only thing to confirm now is whether they are using fresh kittens to test with.
......to be continued
Saturday, 4 August 2007
I suggested he ring them on Monday on +44(0)1327 262 255 and ask what the hell is going on.
Something interesting to read here, taken from the New York Times of 2nd August.
I might approach them and offer a security test in the BRITISH stylee using proper lowlife scum techniques and tools rather than the namby pamby "Oooh, this looks nice and chunky, it MUST be good" approach. I'm happy that the US doesn't have the same theft problem as the UK.
Oh, for any Hindus out there, Brad Quartuccio isn't an incarnation of Lord Krishna, it's a problem with my colour balance on the scanner, sorry about that.
Anyway, I doubt Krishna would ride a pushbike, he'd have a Viman or something and he certainly wouldn't be living in Pittsburg in 2007.
Brad does, however, look more Smurf-like than I am entirely comfortable with.
Saturday, 28 July 2007
From the Sold Secure website today.
Crime statistics indicate that the average car thief would wish to spend no longer than 2½ minutes gaining entry to a vehicle and driving off. The Sold Secure attack test acknowledges this criteria and tests the product for a full five minutes. Thus any Car product bearing our seal of approval must improve your chances of finding your car where you left it. (Unfortunately none of the products is effective against the local authorities illegal parking units!!!!!!) Such has been the success of this scheme; car manufacturers now build in security at the production line stage. Although tests indicate this may have some distance to go before it is totally effective in all cases.
Around 50,000 motorcycles are stolen in this country every year. Many of these are broken down for spares and less than a quarter are ever recovered. A very high percentage of those stolen are actually taken from outside their owners’ homes. It has been interesting to note that a £7000 bike parked in a busy main road may sport several security devices but when at home the bike is propped up against a dustbin in the front garden. A determined thief will take some risks to secure the bike he wants even to lifting them over gates with a crane!
Sold Secure has a single level of Motorcycle Security Approval. Both mechanical and electronic security devices are certified to the same high level. Using a fully specified burglar’s toolkit the motorcycle is proven safe from the average thief. There are a number of options for security at home and also when parked away from home.
Might just be me but I'm sure there are thousands of motorcycle products with a big number 5 next to a Sold Secure logo indicating that it is 5 minute attack tested (for what it's worth).
Maybe one of you kind people would like to contact Sold Secure on Monday and ask them. Sold Secure and the Master Locksmiths Association are one and the same. Just don't tell them I sent you and whatever you do, do NOT mention Almax :o)
Note to self, must get a fully specified burglars tool kit from Maplins on Monday.
5d Great Central Way,
Tel: 01327 262 255
Fax:01327 262 539
Thursday, 26 July 2007
Unless Kryptonite do something spectacularly stupid, I will be concentrating my energies on the real problem here, Sold Secure and Thatcham.
Tuesday, 24 July 2007
"This televised demonstration leads viewers to believe that 42-inch bolt cutters are common tools used by thieves. They are not. The 42-inch bolt cutters used in the show are large in size, expensive to purchase and difficult to obtain (according to our research). Please note that the price of this 42 inch bolt cutter, like the one used in the show, retails for approximately £291-360 ($600-742 U.S. Dollars), and replacement jaws retail for approximately £100.00 ($206 U.S. Dollars). Unfortunately, there will always be people who think it is necessary to publicize ways to perform criminal or other illegal activity. We recognize that and are committed to constantly evaluating technologies and methods for providing products that guard against these most common methods. "
In the meantime, the contradiction fairy has been doing some overtime.
Our internal tests involve a variety of tools used by thieves, such as bolt cutters (including 42 inch bolt cutters), hack saws, hammers, pry bars, grinders, hydraulic devices and a host of other common and uncommon methods. The products are tested to the point of failure in order to understand the limitations and the environments for which the products are best suited. If a new method is heard of by Kryptonite, the products will be retested against that method as well.
So, do thieves use 42" croppers or not?
Full steam ahead for a frantic Kryptonite editing-fest!
ITV Gone in 60 Seconds
Read it all, savour every impeccably crafted and measured word, a glorious gem of damage limitation.
We still cut your Faggydaboodit chain in 11 seconds.
We still broke your New York 3000 in under 60 seconds.
I have read and seen some items on the internet recently that give me great concern regarding the security of my 2 Kryptonite products. I have the New York D lock and the fahgettaboudit chain I have.
They appear to last just seconds and not the many minutes they are supposed to last, It all appears to be legitamate what has been said and if this is the case I hold no faith in them being able to secure my bikes.
Can you respond regarding my concerns.
am sorry but I do not follow what concerns you have for the product. Are you saying you have the NY "D" lock and the Fahgettaboudit chain and someone was able to violate them within a short period of time?
Kryptonite Customer Service
437 Turnpike St.
Canton, MA 02021
Toll Free (USA & Canada Only) 800-729-5625
I have those 2 products, but from what I have seen on the internet and apparently will be shown on UK TV in a few weeks will be these products being broken very quickly, if this is the case I will be somewhat unhappy as they are used to secure some expensive bikes.
We are sorry to hear that you have some concerns about your Kryptonite lock. We hope we can help alleviate some of those concerns.
Kryptonite expertly tests its locks, including the (insert lock in question here provided it is a high end lock), with a variety of tools (bolt cutters, hack saws, hammers, prybars, grinders, hydraulic devices etc.) and in a variety of ways many times over. We also test with tools or devices that are not as commonly available. We have even built equipment that far exceeds methods used on the street. We also constantly analyze data from customer returns and work with law enforcement agencies.
This isn't something that we take lightly and it isn't something that we do just one time. These locks are continuously put through a barrage of tests, including all known methods used on the streets. If we hear of a new method making the rounds, we'll retest our locks to that method, too. If need be, we'll make changes to that lock based on our findings. It's all about staying at least one step ahead of thieves. We are so confident in our high end products, like the New York Fahgettaboudit chain (or insert lock name here), that we offer an anti-theft protection offer with the products.
But, don't just take our word for it. As you will find on our website, we submit our high end locks to independent testing agencies in Europe. You can read about the agencies on our website here:
The New York Fahgettaboudit chain has passed both ART Foundation (Holland) and Sold Secure (UK) at their highest levels. This is not us testing the lock, these are independent agencies that attack the locks (and chains) with everything they've got.
In addition, Cycling Plus in the UK just tested our New York Fahgettaboudit chain, put it up against the competition and it came out the winner. It beat all the chains that were sent to them for the annual test.
We hope that answers and addresses some of your concerns.
Yes, they really did leave in the bit in red that they were meant to fill in with the lock that the customer is refering to, assuming of course that their email has been read.
You couldn't make it up. (Oh, Kryptonite didn't put the "Anti Theft Offer" link in to my blog, I did that.)
Worthy of mention is how throughout the ENTIRE programme, the thieves without exception, used wire cutters to cut wire based locks. Not rocket science one might think, you need to cut wire? use a wire cutter maybe? obvious? Well not that obvious to Sold Secure because despite claiming to use the same tools a thief would use (remember, wire cutters to cut wire, the ones ALL the thieves in the programme used) they used a hammer and a saw to cut a wire, not wire cutters, a hammer and a saw.
And the Kryptonite Faggydaboodit didn't do too well did it? 11 seconds? Tut tut. No denying what it was this time, bold as brass, full packaging and purchased by someone with no connection to myself or Almax at all. Sweet.
Sometimes it's best to let people for their own opinions on something rather than rant, I think this is one of those occasions.
Monday, 23 July 2007
And yes, that includes the popular motorcycle media, I'm happy to help but fair's fair.
Sunday, 22 July 2007
"You have been banned for the following reason:
Bike Forums will not allow Almax or their employees or affiliates to use this forum to promote their product in any way."
A shameful response from a forum which was a leading light and major player in exposing the radial key farce a few years ago, I thought you'd be up for exposing Sold Secure for what they are, obviously not, I wonder what's changed.
Obviously this rule will apply to the numerous Kryptonite devotees that attack with a venomous bile, anyone who dares to suggest that all Kryptonite locks are anything other than the saviour of humanity? No, thought not.
I'm not entirely sure what the problem is here, maybe it was the publicising of the ITV programme Tuesday 24th July at 7:30pm on ITV1 and Sky 993 in which an independently bought Kryptonite Faggydaboodit was cropped in a couple of seconds that upset them, or maybe it was the post where I pasted the Bikesure Insurance press release? Who knows? Who cares?
Saturday, 21 July 2007
What I'd really like to know, is why any manufacturer would actually make anything less than their own maximum rating. I mean the Kryptonite 3000 D lock scores 11 out of 12 (1 being something mainly to fend off bear attack, 7-8 for giving those pesky ginger kids across the road a hard time, and 12 to make sure some 9mm toting gangstah puts a cap in yo ass before he gets your bike). Why make something 11? Why not 12? What's the point in going all the way to 11, then admitting that it's not quite as you thought it would be, so you dropped a point OFF YOUR OWN PRODUCT! It's always struck me as a battle between chronic lack of faith and chronic narcissism, a war to look both humble and strong at the same time. Look at the amount of test authority stickers on "high end" Kryptonite stuff, surely a bazillion test authorities findings must be a sound enough basis on which the public can judge your product? so why bother inventing your own sliding scale of crap<..................ok...............>very reasonable ?
Who knows. I rate this blog post 12 out of 25 on the Captain Cropper Sliding scale of blog post interest.
So there you are, trawling through the D locks and chains at your local Halfords or Wal Mart or whatever and there you see it! A beacon of confidence in one's product, a shining example of a multinational corporation putting its money where its mouth is, fair warms the cockles of yer 'art guvnah. Of course, I am speaking of the fabled and oft quoted (by Kryptonite) "Kryptonite Anti Theft Offer, £1200, see inside for details". How could you possibly resist? I mean your bike gets nicked and Kryptonite pays up to £1200 towards a replacement right?
If you could actually open the packaging without security booting you out, you would see that the "Anti Theft Offer" is merely a pea with a large watermelon's jacket on. The "Offer" is to pay "up to" £1200 off your insurance excess. Don't have insurance? Ah, tough titty, you'll get bugger all then. You have insurance? Jolly good, well done, very sensible. Now read you insurance details, you'll more than likely find a clause in there that insists that you return any portion of the security you used to the insurer before they pay out, great, no problem. This is where it gets sticky, Kryptonite want a copy of your insurance claim before they pay out on your excess so you have to get the remains to the insurer first, now given the glacial speed with which insurance companies move, would it be unreasonable to assume that there is the teensiest possibility that they won't put the return of your broken lock at the top of their "To Do" list?
And there are time limitations too, and police reports etc...I will expand on this at a later date when I have the full list of hoops you have to jump through to satisfy Kryptonite.
This is the best bit.....ready? Kryptonite will pay up to £1200 (bike) of your insurance excess, so far so good, E&L insurers have a £100 excess on bikes £3000 and over so I think we can safely assume that unless you have a bike that costs £30,000 and you INSIST that you pay more excess, that you will NEVER get anywhere near the £1200 "Anti Theft Offer" maximum payout from Kryptonite.
Maybe it's just me, but if you have "£1200 Anti Theft Offer" plastered all over the packaging of a £60 D lock, then it's surely not too much to ask to also print some of the inconvenient details somewhere you can read them without ripping that package open. I wonder how many people have bought a Kryptonite product and then had a bike stolen only to find that they could not claim a penny from them because they COULDN'T read the small print when buying the product.
In my world this is called misleading advertising.
It occurred to me today that not everyone would understand why I spend all this time and money busting up motorcycle and bicycle security products, believe me, it's crossed my mind on several occasions, usually after vicious forum attacks from employees of the people whose stuff I am breaking. I guess the bottom line is that I dislike untruth, lies, misinformation, and deceit, call it what you will, bikers and cyclists have been on the thick end of institutionalised lies and incompetence for many years now and have paid the price.
It began after having my Piaggio Typhoon 125 stolen from outside my house, it had a "high security" cable lock. Fortunately for me, they left the cable behind for me to inspect. It appeared that after trying to cut the cable with croppers, they failed and went for the locking pin, which succeeded and I lost my scooter.
It was some time till I replaced the scooter with a Yamaha Fazer and ultimately a Harley. I crashed the Harley in 2001, I was lucky to have police in attendance that understood the theft problem in the Essex area and kindly locked my Harley up at the side of the road while my arm was screwed back together. Whilst under the chill pill at the hospital, my flatmate popped in to inform me that the Harley had been stolen from the roadside that same night, this was fortuitous as it was under 6 months old and pretty smashed up from the crash, I ended up with 95% of the value from the insurers so not too bad a turn out. 24 hours later, he returned to tell me that my Italjet Formula 125 had been stolen from outside the house, not the end of the world because it wasn't working anyway, but it wasn't insured so I lost out on that one.
What I did draw from the whole sorry experience was a realisation that vehicle theft in the UK was rife and pretty much un-checked by the powers that be, ok so that's one reason for the theft crime wave, another reason is that we have been betrayed by the very people who we place out trust in to test our security products for us, I'm talking about Sold Secure and Thatcham.
This is where my mission really kicks off. In 2005 I was asked by Almax Security Chains if I would like to help out with cropping chains at the NEC bike show in Birmingham, I pointed out that I had very little experience with cropping chains but accepted anyway just for the experience, and what an experience it was. Over the five days that I was there, I must have cropped most of the Sold Secure "Gold" status line-up and pretty much all of Thatchams', in addition to that, I witnessed the ugly face of corporate cover-ups first hand.
It was pretty much just another day as the show, about lunchtime, when the Oxford Products goons turned up in their fetching Oxford blue embroidered shirts and ties, we'd been cropping their chains for days now, usually in under 20 seconds, and we made sure they knew about it. Couple of hours later we were told by NEC management that "someone" had complained that we were cropping their chains and that we had to remove the branded sleeves from the "Wall of Shame" or we would be asked to leave. It was pure luck that there was a member of MCN staff on the stall who overheard the whole thing and made a mini story out of it in that week's MCN, result! Obviously we had peed off Oxford and that alone made my day. :o)
We complied with the request but carried on cropping Mickey Mouse security products with impunity to the horror of people who had these products securing their VERY expensive motorcycles, people's reaction to Sold Secure and Thatcham passing products that obviously couldn't fend off a 5 minute attack was predictable, "How can they pass this crap!", "I thought it was supposed to last 5 minutes" etc....
Back on track, Sold Secure and Thatcham. This baffles me, Sold Secure pass an Oxford Monster chain and lock claiming it stands up to a 5 minute attack using the same tools I do (I have a copy of the Sold Secure tool list) yet I have REPEATEDLY cropped this in front of witnesses in under 30 seconds. Obviously we have to ask the question "why"? How is it that a fat office worker can bust a chain in 30 seconds and that Sold Secure (now owned by the Master Locksmiths Association of all people) can't. It's not that they are unaware, of the problem, ex Sold Secure MD Martin White was made aware of the problem by Motorcycle News in 2006 and I quote, "There is an anomaly here and we are looking at it. I will get samples of the lock in doubt and re-test them, if they fail, then we'll work on the suspension procedure, and our approval will be removed pending a retest". In the same article Mr White stated "We don't attack locks as vigorously as thieves do", a spectacular faux pas by Mr White who resigned shortly after the MCN article went to press.
Sold Secure have done exactly bugger all since then, more products have been passed, standards are as dire as ever and YOU carry on trusting them to provide you with bona fide test approved products. Some people say that something is better than nothing, on this occasion I disagree. A skinny chain with a grand "5 Minute Attack Tested" sticker on it will appeal more than a slightly chunkier chain with no such accreditation; Sold Secure/Thatcham approval hinders common sense and our own judgement.
So what's next? Well I'm hoping the ITV programme on 24th July 7:30pm will put a rocket up the test "authorities" arses, in my opinion Sold Secure needs to be shut down and re started with the Home Office overseeing the testing and test criteria and Thatcham should just get out of motorcycle security testing altogether. There's only so much a few people can do to make a change, if you've seen the videos, watched the programme and maybe seen some demo's of chain cropping, then call Sold Secure/Thatcham and ask what they are doing to improve things or whether they are going to be visibly more thorough in their testing in future.
If you don't like the way things are and you're in a position to make them change, do it!
Saturday, 14 July 2007
BIKESURE CALLS TIME ON BIKE THIEVES
Upcoming TV exposé on bike theft epidemic:
"About time too" says leading bike insurer
In the wake of the bike crime wave, especially in London, specialist motorbike insurer Bikesure is demanding the motorbiking industry sorts out the issue of security and is offering discounts for customers who use certain specified security products.
"It's a known fact that many of the motorcycle security products sold today don't work - they can be broken into in seconds," says Robert Balls of Bikesure. "Even locks and chains that are Thatcham or Sold Secure-approved often aren't good enough to stop a thief for more than a minute.
"People who buy an expensive 'Gold Level Approval' product, in good faith, expect it to work. It's time they knew many of them don't."
ITV London will take the lid off the issue on July 24th, when 'Gone In 60 Seconds' looks at London's epidemic of bike theft, and the shortcomings of existing bike security products. A segment of the show focuses on motorbike locks and demonstrates how one Sold Secure-approved product took just 2 seconds to break open. Of the three motorbike security products on test (another of which is Thatcham-approved), the best lasted just 11 seconds.
"It's about time this issue was highlighted," comments Robert Balls. He says that motorcycle owners need to be able to trust the products they use. For several years Bikesure has been working with Almax, the security specialist interviewed for the Gone in 60 Seconds show.
"Almax was the company that first highlighted the issue, not only by showing how chains can be bolt-cropped but also by developing thief-proof security products - including security chains and devices that can't be practically bolt cropped - that we've been recommending to bikers, even before they were officially approved."
Alex Simpson of Almax says they want to see the standards upgraded. "The argument is that these chains and cables are deterrents - but a chain you can bolt crop in 11 seconds is no deterrent for a thief."
Bikesure has a list of security products, including several from the Almax range, that the company believes will foil most thieves. To encourage bikers to improve the security of their motorbikes, the company is giving a 10% discount off insurance to riders who use any product from the list.
Meanwhile anyone buying an Almax motorcycle security product can claim a further £25 discount off a Bikesure policy.
For more information on Almax, and to see videos of high security motorbike chains being bolt cropped, visit www.almax-security-chains.co.uk The company can be contacted on 0191 264 2773.
Bikesure has a huge range of specialist policies for the motorcycle enthusiast, including schemes for performance and custom bikes, scooters, trikes, quads and bug riders. For details freephone the Bikesure quote line on 0800 089 2000, email the company at firstname.lastname@example.org or visit www.bikesure.co.uk
So, there you have it, hopefully the beginning of a mini revolution, insurers are FINLALLY waking up to the fact that just because there's a Sold Secure or Thatcham sticker on somthing, it doesn't mean that it will actually stand up to a 5 minute attack as claimed.
Surely more turd/fan interfacing on the way with the ITV programme "GONE IN 60 SECONDS: THE BIKE THEFT CRIME WAVE" highlighting the chronic state of bicycle locks and security, guest stars: Abus, Squire and special appearance by Kryptonite. It's on ITV1 and Sky 993 on 24th July 7:30pm, if you like to watch scrotes squirm, be sure to tune in.
More intriguing developments with Kraptonite, their blog https://www.blogger.com/comment.g?blogID=38894705&postID=8668618135436202698 is now a pre-approval blog if you want to leave comments, odd. Not as odd as the email address given out on the blog for enquiries, email@example.com, www.irco.com is Ingersoll Rand, the mother company, is the impending doom going to be too great for Kryptonite to deal with on their own?
Friday, 13 July 2007
Friday, 6 July 2007
It would appear that because the OLD Kryptonite FAGhettaboudit chain I was given, didn't have precisely the same amount of sides as the NEW FAGhettaboudit chain, the entire video is fake. Well I have news for Kryptonite, your new chain is even more lame than the old one, yes, you should have kept quiet, now I'll have to get a NEW FAGhettaboudit chain and destroy it in less time. Maybe I'll do a New York D lock just for the heck of it.
Also amusing are the Kryptonite henchmen trawling forums with the sole aim to drown anyone daring to suggest that their products aren't actually made from Kryptonite, in bullshit. The persistent tirade of accusations and snyde comments do little to mask the reality that their security products do not stand up to use in good old England. Maybe they do well in I Love Lucy USA but we have PROPER thieves over here, not dipstick mouthbreathers who use saws, hammers and clubs crafted from buffalo bone.
If course, Kryptonite are not total strangers to adverse publicity, they were only 4 years late in addressing the round key farce (Oxford shown in video, Kryptonite fessed up anyway) http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=-zy8sEj8etU so no wonder they seek to crush anyone who may threaten to expose their lame chains and dodgy D locks for what they are.
Also unsurprising is their almost religious devotion to Cycling Plus's test criteria, check this out.
It took them 8 minutes to cut both sides of a Kryptonite chain that isn't worthy to secure my bathplug, I broke exactly the same chain today, twice, in under 30 seconds a piece and using a non powered tool that fits in a small rucksack, I also broke an Oxford Monster, an Abus something or other, a PJB Titan, a Squire MC4, an Abus City Black chain and whatever else I had lying around, all in well under 40 seconds using the previously mentioned tool.
This brings me nicely to the subject of Sold Secure. Now ALL of the chains in the first Youtube clip were either Sold Secure GOLD or Thatcham Cat 3, Sold Secure GOLD is supposed to be 5 minute attack tested, as you can see, we managed to break them in ever so slightly less than 5 minutes, now THAT has to make you wonder what the hell is going on. If a porky office worker can break them in under a minute, then a pumped on adrenaline yoof in a hoodie will probably do it even quicker, the question still remains, why can Sold Secure and Thatcham not replicate it? Could it be because a replication would result in most of their approved list being scrapped along with repeat fees for subsequent years of testing? No, it couldn't possibly be anything like that.