This is a pretty nifty hidden door lock

[Guywithoutajeep]

http://www.hasuco.com/secu/secu_03a.htm

You can even phone in a long distance lock/unlock. I'd throw this thing onto the back side of a hidden door.

I was also just thinking that you could probably put this on a door for a room you'd want a snoopy landlord to stay out of.

 

[whatissixbynine]

.

 

[komrade komura]

U DA MAN!!!

I have been looking for this type of item for the last month!

Thanks m8.

 

[NiteTiger]

That looks pretty awesome, nice find!

 

[BeardedClam]

Oh shit I lost my remote! Shit my ladies are locked in the panic room!
Honey bring me my axe! !SMASH SMASH SMASH! Woo, I in.
"Babe, I found your remote in the couch again."
We better run to lowes and get another door.

I like both styles of locks, A+ find.

 

[old red eyes]

anyone know where to find one of these locks?

 

[LEDfoot]

Alibaba but you need to buy at least five.

 

[PhenoMenal]

Interesting concept/device, but ...

If they were any good you'd think they could at least hire a kid to get their English on their webpage right, I find it hard to trust a company when they make a dozen errors in their first two paragraphs. And the original post was in 2010 ... three years later they still haven't fixed up any grammatical errors, not very professional, and when it comes to security devices you'd expect professionalism.

Also, "The remote control system is embedded with 3.2 billion secret codes" ... what the ****??? Secure cryptographic systems don't store keys, and 3.2 billion is actually a very tiny number these days in regards to brute-force attacks (secure cryptosystems these days have keyspace sizes larger than the number of atoms in the entire universe -- even Germany's WW2 Enigma machine achieved this keyspace level). This is elementary cryptography, and if nothing else they've demonstrated that they've failed, quite miserably. The idea is there - the cryptographic security isn't.

It's probably not an issue for most users of the device, but ... just a heads-up of a basic, fundamental design flaw, which is completely unacceptable considering this is supposed to be a cryptographically-secured security device. Law enforcement agencies would be laughing more than I am, because it won't cause them any problems bypassing.

There are other manufacturers of similar locks, so I'd be looking elsewhere
(and the original poster is only a Guest, not a registered icmag member ... could've been working/spamming for them for all we know)