News for hackers. Stuff that matters.

A comment on Reports from Nest Secure customers who are unable to arm/disarm or lock/unlock. Parent comment

Re:Reports from Nest Secure customers who are unable to arm/... by mynameisvlad on Thursday May 17, 2018 @11:19AM (#17092036)
Most smart locks only replace the "back" part of the lock anyway, or augment the physical key slot to leave it as a backup, so, the point still stands that it only introduces new attack vectors. You'd still have the problem of someone being able to copy your "do not duplicate" key not to mention bumping/picking the lock, along with hacking the smart portion of the lock.

In the end, it's your decision, but the OP's comment stands fully: all the same attack vectors still exist, along with a bunch of new ones at the expense of convenience.

[ Parent | on HN ]
Re:Reports from Nest Secure customers who are unable to arm/... by dragonwriter on Thursday May 17, 2018 @11:40AM (#17092266)
> You'd still have the problem of someone being able to copy your "do not duplicate" key

Only if you distribute the “do not duplicate” key, but the whole point is to not do that.

[ Parent | on HN ]
Re:Reports from Nest Secure customers who are unable to arm/... by steve_musk on Thursday May 17, 2018 @11:39AM (#17092260)
I the the idea was you wouldn’t have to give out the key to renters and could just give them passcode/phone access, so it actually would be removing an attack vector.
[ Parent | on HN ]