Why no remote unlock?

"Ash Wyllie" wrote in message
...
Gig 601XL Builder opined

Ash Wyllie wrote:


Weight.

TSA

Can you imagine the uproar if people learned that airplanes could be
unlocked from a distance?


TSA could care less.

The TSA wants 2 locks on every plane. Considering how easy it is to steal
an
unlock code, just imagine how they would react to such a security hole!

-ash
Cthulhu in 2008!
Vote the greater evil.


It may not even be necessary for a bandit to ever actually know the code.

Peter
P.S.: That sig line is too true to be really funny this year!

"Peter Dohm" wrote in message
...

"Matt W. Barrow" wrote in message
...


The odds of that are millions to one...about like your neighbor having
the same code for their garage door opener.

Actually, there are surprisingly few codes on any given frequency,
especially since each key fob uses three and sometimes four of the
available codes--for open/close/panic and typically trunk release. It is
actually a fraction of the codes available for a typical four tumbler key
lock for any given type of key blank--so you can probably think of a
transmitting frequency as being analogous to a style of key blank.

IIUC, a fob can have one frequency and over one million correlation codes.

On 2008-03-17, Tina wrote:
What's really needed are fancy wheel covers, and a rear view mirror
where we can hang fuzzy dice.

Ours does have a rear view mirror!

Then again, we use ours to tow gliders from time to time, and the pilot
needs to keep an eye on what the glider's doing.

--
From the sunny Isle of Man.
Yes, the Reply-To email address is valid.

On 2008-03-18, Matt W. Barrow wrote:
The odds of that are millions to one...about like your neighbor having the
same code for their garage door opener.

In a country with a lot of people, and a lot of cars, million to one
chances happen rather frequently. A few years ago my Dad was just
getting ready to drive off in his car when it locked and the alarm went
off - someone had just parked the same model of car nearby and locked it
with the remote. Both cars responded to the lock.

--
From the sunny Isle of Man.
Yes, the Reply-To email address is valid.

On Mar 16, 10:14*pm, "Robert M. Gary" wrote:
I use my plane for family transportation. So the wife and kids don't
see a lot of difference between running out to the plane to go to
Mexico vs. going out to the car. So when the family runs out ahead and
we have the car I hit the remote unlock. The other day my wife asked
why the plane doesn't have a remote unlock. When you think about it;
why not have the same ease-of-use items in the plane as the car.

-robert (greetings from remote Mexico)

Hadn't been invented in 1966.
--
Gene Seibel
Gene & Sue's Aeroplanes - http://pad39a.com/gene/planes.html
Because we fly, we envy no one.

"Dylan Smith" wrote in message
...
On 2008-03-18, Matt W. Barrow wrote:
The odds of that are millions to one...about like your neighbor having
the
same code for their garage door opener.

In a country with a lot of people, and a lot of cars, million to one
chances happen rather frequently. A few years ago my Dad was just
getting ready to drive off in his car when it locked and the alarm went
off - someone had just parked the same model of car nearby and locked it
with the remote. Both cars responded to the lock.

You have a million people within 500 feet (the range of a fob/garage door
opened) of you at any one time?

They're LONG odds, not impossibility.

Further, "a few years ago" such devices had maybe 200 codes and no
preventive logic.

Now, the systems are far more sophisticated.

Matt W. Barrow wrote:

"Dylan Smith" wrote in message
...
On 2008-03-18, Matt W. Barrow wrote:
The odds of that are millions to one...about like your neighbor having
the
same code for their garage door opener.

In a country with a lot of people, and a lot of cars, million to one
chances happen rather frequently. A few years ago my Dad was just
getting ready to drive off in his car when it locked and the alarm went
off - someone had just parked the same model of car nearby and locked it
with the remote. Both cars responded to the lock.

You have a million people within 500 feet (the range of a fob/garage door
opened) of you at any one time?

Not relevant.

Given trips to malls, the supermarket, etc. in metro areas, it wouldn't
take long to have been exposed to a million people within 500 feet.

They're LONG odds, not impossibility.

Precisely the point; it isn't impossible, just unlikely.

Further, "a few years ago" such devices had maybe 200 codes and no
preventive logic.

Now, the systems are far more sophisticated.

True, making it even less likely but still not impossible.

--
Jim Pennino

Remove .spam.sux to reply.

wrote in message
...
Matt W. Barrow wrote:

"Dylan Smith" wrote in message
...
On 2008-03-18, Matt W. Barrow wrote:
The odds of that are millions to one...about like your neighbor having
the
same code for their garage door opener.

In a country with a lot of people, and a lot of cars, million to one
chances happen rather frequently. A few years ago my Dad was just
getting ready to drive off in his car when it locked and the alarm went
off - someone had just parked the same model of car nearby and locked
it
with the remote. Both cars responded to the lock.

You have a million people within 500 feet (the range of a fob/garage door
opened) of you at any one time?

Not relevant.

Completely relevant - it's the basis of how the devices are designed and how
codes are arranged.


Given trips to malls, the supermarket, etc. in metro areas, it wouldn't
take long to have been exposed to a million people within 500 feet.

The relevance is "at any one time".


They're LONG odds, not impossibility.

Precisely the point; it isn't impossible, just unlikely.

Further, "a few years ago" such devices had maybe 200 codes and no
preventive logic.

Now, the systems are far more sophisticated.

True, making it even less likely but still not impossible.

Bone up a bit on "risk management".

Matt W. Barrow wrote:

wrote in message
...
Matt W. Barrow wrote:

"Dylan Smith" wrote in message
...
On 2008-03-18, Matt W. Barrow wrote:
The odds of that are millions to one...about like your neighbor having
the
same code for their garage door opener.

In a country with a lot of people, and a lot of cars, million to one
chances happen rather frequently. A few years ago my Dad was just
getting ready to drive off in his car when it locked and the alarm went
off - someone had just parked the same model of car nearby and locked
it
with the remote. Both cars responded to the lock.

You have a million people within 500 feet (the range of a fob/garage door
opened) of you at any one time?

Not relevant.

Completely relevant - it's the basis of how the devices are designed and how
codes are arranged.

I highly doubt anyone ever seriously concidered the implications of being
within 500 feet of a million people -AT ANY ONE TIME- since it would
be physically impossible.


Given trips to malls, the supermarket, etc. in metro areas, it wouldn't
take long to have been exposed to a million people within 500 feet.

The relevance is "at any one time".

Not hardly.

The probability of someone having a matching device is dependent on
the number of exposures to others having such a device.

The probability of it happening within the next 10 seconds is extremely
low.

The probability of it happening within the next 10 years is a lot higher.

The only way to make the probability 0 is to never make more than one
device with a given set of characteristics.

They're LONG odds, not impossibility.

Precisely the point; it isn't impossible, just unlikely.

Further, "a few years ago" such devices had maybe 200 codes and no
preventive logic.

Now, the systems are far more sophisticated.

True, making it even less likely but still not impossible.

Bone up a bit on "risk management".

Bone up a bit on "probability".


--
Jim Pennino

Remove .spam.sux to reply.

wrote in message
...
Matt W. Barrow wrote:


You have a million people within 500 feet (the range of a fob/garage
door
opened) of you at any one time?

Not relevant.

Completely relevant - it's the basis of how the devices are designed and
how
codes are arranged.

I highly doubt anyone ever seriously concidered the implications of being
within 500 feet of a million people -AT ANY ONE TIME- since it would
be physically impossible.

Downtown Manhattan.



Given trips to malls, the supermarket, etc. in metro areas, it wouldn't
take long to have been exposed to a million people within 500 feet.

The relevance is "at any one time".

Not hardly.

Only having that number of people AT ONE TIME is relevant in that ONLY then
can they set off your device.

(Not willing to play adolesant games any longer)